ERRATA 



OP THE 



PKOTESTANT BIBLE 



TRUTH OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS EXAMINED; 

IN A TREATISE, 

SHOWING SOME OF THE ERRORS THAT ARE TO BE FOUND IN THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS 
OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES, USED BY PROTESTANTS, AGAINST SUCH POINTS OF 
RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE AS ARE THE SUBJECT OF CONTROVERSY BETWEEN 
THEM AND THE MEMBERS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ; 



IN WHICH ALSO, 

FROM THEIR MISTRANSLATING THE TWENTY-THIRD VERSE OF THE FOURTEENTH CHAPTER 
OF THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, THE CONSECRATION OF DR. MATTHEW PARKER 
THE FIRST PROTESTANT ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, 
IS OCCASIONALLY CONSIDERED. 

BY THOMAS WARD, ESQ,. 



A NEW EDITION, CAREFULLY REVISED AND CORRECTED. 



TO WHICH ARE ADDED, 

THE CELEBRATED PREFACE OF THE REV. D C T O RLINGARD 

IN ANSWER TO RYAN'S " ANALYSIS, 

AND 

A VINDICATION, BY THE RIGHT REV. DOCTOR MILNER, 

IN ANSWER TO GRIER'S " REPLY." 



" For I testify to every one that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book : If any man shall add to these things, 
God shall add unto him the plagues written in this book. And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of 
this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the Book of Life, and out of the Holy City, and from these things which 
are written in this book." Revelations xxii. 18, 19. 

NEW YORK : 
PUBLISHED BY D & J. SADLIER, c 

No. 58 GOLD STREET. *M 
1844. 



1<344 



TO THE 



RIGHT REVEREND JOHN FENNELLY, 



VICAR APOSTOLIC OF MADRAS, 



BISHOP OF CASTORIA, 



THIS EDITION OF WARD'S INVALUABLE WORK, 



AGAINST 



THE GROSSEST OF ALL CORRUPTIONS, 



THE CORRUPTION OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES, 



IS 



MOST RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED, 



AS A SMALL TESTIMONY OF THE HIGH ESTEEM AND VENERATION 



IN WHICH HIS LORDSHIP IS nELD, 



BY 



HIS LORDSHIP S 



MOST OBEDIENT HUMBLE SERVANTS, 



THE EDITOR AND PUBLISHER. 



25, Anglesea-street, Dublin, 
1st July, 1841. 



CONTENTS. 



PAGE 

Preface to the Fourth Edition, . ... •■■ ••• ••• ••• ■•• * « 

The Author's Preface, ... ... •• - •• •• - 15—24 

The Truth of Protestant Translations of the Bible examined, ... ... ... 25 — 31 

Of the Canonical Books of Scripture, ... ... •■• ••• — 32 

Of Books rejected by Protestants for Apocryphal, ... ... ... ... 33 — 39 

Protestant Translations against the Church, ... ... ... ... 40, 41 

" " against the Blessed Sacrament and Sacrifice of the Mass, ... 42, 43 

" " against the Blessed Sacrament and the Altar, ... ... 44, 45 

" " against Priests and Priesthood, ... ... ... 46, 47 

" " against Priesthood and Holy Orders, ... ... ... 48, 49 

" " against the Authority of Priests, ... ... ... 50, 51 

" " against Episcopal Authority, ... ... ... 52, 53 

'* " against the Single Lives of Priests, ... ... ... 54, 55 

" " against the Sacrament of Baptism, ... ... ... 56, 57 

" " against Confession and the Sacrament of Penance, .. 58, 59 

" " against the Honour of our Blessed Lady and other Saints, ... 60, 61 

" " against the Distinction of Relative and Divine Worship, ... 62, 63 

" " against Sacred Images, ... ... ... ... 64, 65 

" " against the Use of Sacred Images, ... ... ... 66 — 69 

" " against Limbus Patrum and Purgatory, ... ... ... 70 — 73 

" " against Justification and the Reward of Good Works, ... 74, 75 

" " against Merits and Meritorious Works, ... ... 76, 77 

" " against Free Will, ... ... ... ... ... 78, 79 

" " against Inherent Justice, ... ... ... ... 80, 81 

" " in defence of the Sufficiency of Faith alone, ... ... 82, 83 

" " against Apostolical Traditions, ... .. ... 84 — 86 

" " against the Sacrament of Marriage, ... ... ... 87 

Protestant Corruptions by adding to the Text ... ... ... ... 88 — 90 

Considerations on the Lambeth Records, ... .. ... ... ... 91 — 97 

Protestant Translation against the Perpetual Sacrifice, ... ... ... 98-101 

" Corruptions of the Scripture, ... ... ... ... ... 102-107 

" Absurdities in turning Psalms into Metre, ... ... ... ... 108-111 

A Vindication of the Roman Catholics, ... ... ... ... ... 112,113 

A Vindication of Ward's Errata, in Reply to Grier, by the Right Rev. Dr. Milner, 114-118 



PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION. 

BY DR. LINGARD. 



The publication of Ward's " Errata to the 
Protestant Bible 1 ' has disclosed a most curious 
and important fact, that the scriptural church 
of England and Ireland was originally founded 
on a false translation of the scriptures. It was 
the boast of the first reformers, that they had 
emancipated their disciples from the shackles 
of Catholic despotism, and had restored lo them 
the freedom of the children of God : it now 
appears, that this freedom consisted in reading 
an erroneous version of the inspired Avritings, 
and in venerating as the dictates of eternal 
Wisdom the blunders of ignorant or interested 
translators. " The scriptures," they exclaimed, 
" are the sole rule of faith. Here they are, no 
longer concealed under the obscurity of a 
learned language, but exhibited to you in your 
native tongue- Here you will easily detect the 
errors of Popery, and learn the true doctrine of 
the Gospel." The credulity of multitudes ac- 
cepted with joy the proffered boon ; the new 
teachers were hailed as apostles commissioned 
by heaven ; and every old woman, both male and 
female, that could read, became an adept, if 
not in the knowledge of the Bible, at least in 
the prejudices and errors of its translators. 

It is not for man to dispute the wisdom of 
Providence, and arraign at the bar of his private 
judgment the means which God may choose for 
the diffusion of religious knowledge. Otherwise, 
I must confess, there appears to me something 
very unaccountable in the scriptural blunders of 
the apostles of the reformation. The object, they 
said, of their mission was the dissemination of 
evangelic truth. If the Holy Spirit selected them 
for this important office, he must also have gifted 
them with the true knowledge of the scriptures, 
and, if he gifted them with the true knowledge 
of the scriptures, it seems to follow that he 
ought also to have granted them the power to 
make a true translation of the scriptures. The 
apostles of Jesus received the knowledge of 
tongues, that they might instruct the different 
nations of the earth : the apostles of the church 
of England and Ireland ought to have received 
the knowledge of, at least, the Hebrew and 
Greek tongues, that they might form an accurate 
version of the scriptures. Such a version was 
as necessary to that church, as the instructions 
of the first apostles could be to the primitive 
churches of Christianity. If they were apostol- 
ical, she was scriptural. However, without 
speculating on the cause, the fact is certain, not 
only from the arguments of Ward, but even 



from the concessions of his adversaries, that the 
fathers of this scriptural church gave it a version 
of the scriptures abounding with errors. Arid 
here it may reasonably be asked, whence arose 
these errors ? Were they the offspring of igno- 
rance, or design ? Dr. Ryan warmly contends 
for the former, and endeavours to fortify his 
opinion by the authority of Father Simon : (a) 
but then, even admitting his assertions, devoid 
as they are of proof, and liable to objection, 
what are we to think of the temerity of these 
men, who, incompetent to the task, and con- 
scious of their incompetency, still presumed to 
violate the purity of the sacred volumes, and to 
obtrude on their unsuspecting disciples an erro- 
neous version as the immaculate word of God, 
and as the sole and infallible guide to religious 
truth ? Ward, on the contrary, attempts to 
show that the more important of their errors 
were committed by design ; and a curious cir- 
cumstance it is, highly corroborative of his 
opinion, that most of their blunders are favour- 
able to their own peculiar doctrines, and unfa- 
vourable to those of their opponents. But, if 
this be true, what judgment can any unpreju- 
diced man form of these saints of the reforma- 
tion ? For my part, I know of no crime more 
foul in its own nature, more prejudicial in its 
consequences, more nearly allied to diabolic 
malignity, than that of designedly corrupting the 
holy scriptures, and, by such corruption, leading 
the sincere inquirer into error, and converting 
the food of life into the poison of death. 

But, from whatever source these false ren- 
derings proceeded, whether their authors were 
guided by policy or misled by ignorance, this must 
be conceded, that if Ward has fairly established 
the fact, he is entitled to the gratitude of the im- 
partial reader. The impartial reader, let him 
be Protestant or Catholic, will, if his object be 
truth, thankfully receive the truth from whatever 
hand may present it to him. Hence it was with no 
small surprise that I heard the clamour which was 
raised against the last edition of the " Errata," 
In parliament and out of parliament, in news- 
papers and pamphlets, it was stigmatized as an 
attempt to vilify the reformation, and to heap 
disgrace on the Established Church. " It was 
the work," observed an eminent senator, emi- 
nent for the only talent he possesses, that of 

(<z) Ryan's Analysis, p. 5. Simon, however, in the pas- 
sage referred to, does not speak of the English translator 
in particular, but of the Protestant translators in general. 
This Dr. Ryan has thought fit to conceal from his readers. 



2 PREFACE TO THE 

religious calumny, " it was the work of one 
hundred and twenty Popish priests leagued to 
put down Protestantism." Such nonsense 
hardly deserves notice. If facts are to be hidden 
from the eye of the public, because they reflect 
on the character of our predecessors, let history 
at once be condemned to the flames. The 
evangelists did not conceal the treachery of Ju- 
das : why should Protestant divines wish to 
conceal the blunders or the frauds of the fathers 
of their church ? 

To me, it appears, that none among the ad- 
versaries of Ward have had the courage, or the 
honesty to do justice to that writer. His object 
in compiling the " Errata," was twofold : firstly, 
to prove that the versions of the scripture on 
which the established creed was originally 
founded, were extremely corrupt : and secondly, 
to show that though many errors have been 
since corrected, there still remain many others 
to correct. All this however they prudently 
overlook ; and by an artful confusion of times 
and persons, by referring to modern Bibles the 
charges which he makes against those of a for- 
mer age, and by affecting to consider his accu- 
sation of the clergy of Queen Elizabeth as 
directed against the clergy of the present reign, 
they pretend to convict him of misrepresentation 
and calumny. In this, perhaps, they may act 
wisely ; they certainly act unfairly. Could they 
have shown that Ward had attributed to the 
ancient English Bible errors which it did not 
contain, or that he had attributed to the present 
Bibles errors which have been corrected in them, 
they might have substantiated their charges 
against him. But this they have not attempted. 
They content themselves with exclaiming that 
many of the former corruptions have been 
corrected, and therefore should not have been 
mentioned. But why should they not ? The 
very fact of their having been corrected is an 
unanswerable proof of Ward's assertion. It 
shows beyond the possibility of a doubt, that the 
church of England, however scriptural it may 
pretend to have been in its origin, was in reality 
founded on a false version of the scriptures ; a 
version which was a very Babel of confusion, 
which spoke sometimes the language of God and 
often the language of men, which had attempted 
to improve the lessons of eternal truth by the 
addition of the whims, the ignorance, the pre- 
judices, and the falsehoods of Tyndal, Coverdale, 
Cranmer, &c, &c. 

Among the opponents of Ward, the fiercest 
and the only one who has attempted a full refu- 
tation of the " Errata," is Dr. Ryan. His at- 
tempt is a consequence of the grant of Ireland 
which Adrian IV. made to Henry II. Nay, 
start not, gentle reader ; the most important 
events may often be traced to remote and almost 
imperceptible causes. The attempt of Dr. 
Ryan is a consequence of the grant of Ireland 
by Adrian IV. to Henry II. By that grant 
the Ryans lost an extensive property ;(a) and the 
present Dr. is the champion reserved by heaven 



FOURTH EDITION. 

to revenge on Popery the injuries which she 
inflicted on his ancestors six centuries ago. An 
awful lesson this to the ambition of princes ! 
But let us see, how the Dr. proceeds in the work 
of vengeance. He has divided his treatise into 
different sections, corresponding with those of 
the " Errata." In reviewing it, I shall follow 
the same order. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

THE CHURCH. 

Under this head Ward has adduced no less 
than seven texts in which the English translators 
had substituted the word congregation for 
church ; to which Dr. Ryan replies, " that the 
former mistranslations of these seven texts, 
having been corrected in the present Bible, 
should have been excluded from the catalogue 
of the ' Errata.' "(b) This plea has, I trust, been 
sufficiently refuted in the preceding observations. 
That the correction has taken place, is indeed 
an improvement in the present Bible ; but it is 
at the same time a condemnation of its prede- 
cessors. After the correction, Ward should 
not have imputed these errors to the corrected 
copies ; neither has he done so : he should have 
imputed them to the more ancient copies, and 
in doing so, he is justified by the very concession 
of his adversary. " But," continues the Dr., 
" he produces an eighth text to show that we 
have been guilty of misconstruction to injure 
his church. In the Romish version it is written : 
my dove is one ; (Cant. xi. 8 :) in ours, my dove 
is but one ; a <Heurious proof of malice to his 
church ! Many of his errata are of this kind ; 
frivolous in themselves ; and affording no proof 
or but feeble proofs of the propositions he main- 
tains."^) Now, reader, what canst thou infer 
from this passage, but that Ward had censured 
the Protestant version for having adopted the 
reading, my dove is but one ? The reverse, 
however, is the truth. Ward did not censure, 
he approved that reading. His censure was 
levelled against the more ancient reading in the 
English Bibles, my dove is alone. " But this," 
he adds, "is also amended." Such was the 
candour of Ward, that he carefully pointed out 
to his reader every correction. Of the candour 
of Dr. Ryan I wish I could speak with equal 
commendation. But he has begun his analysis 
with an artifice, which it will be impossible for 
him to palliate, much less to justify. He has 
suppressed the real assertion of his adversary, 
which he could not controvert, and has substi- 
tuted in its place an assertion so palpably 
absurd that it could not fail to make an impres- 
sion on the mind of the uninformed reader highly 
prejudicial to the character of Ward. Nor 
has the Dr. left his artifice to work its own 
effect. He has aided it by his own observations : 
and has of consequence charged the author of 



(a) Anal., p. 58. 



(b) Ibid., p. 11. 



(c) Ibid. 



PREFACE TO THE 

the " Errata " with labouring to create disagree- 
ments where there was perfect harmony ; and 
wishing to widen instead of contracting the 
breach between the two churches, (a) Such 
is the honesty of our biblical Aristarchus. But 
if he cannot claim the praise of honesty, he may 
claim at least that of consistency. The fraud 
with which he has commenced his controversial 
career, he has been careful to repeat in every 
stage of it. He was fully aware that in works 
of the imagination, according to the masters of 
the art, perfection cannot be attained, unless 
character be preserved throughout. 

Serveter ad immm, 
Qualis ab incapto processerit, el sibi constct. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

THE BLESSED SACRAMENT, AND 
THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. 

Dr. Ryan commences his strictures on this 
section by observing, that five of the texts pro- 
duced by Ward having been corrected in the 
modern Bibles, should have been excluded from 
the " Errata." I shall not fatigue the patience 
of the reader by repeating what I have already 
said on the subject of these concessions : but 
shall content myself with reminding him how 
extremely corrupt that version must have been, 
the defence of which is thus abandoned by its 
warmest advocate. He proceeds : " The other 
three texts have no relation to the sacrament 
even in his own translations, as will appear by 
exhibiting them. Whom heaven truly must receive 
— let us cast wood upon his bread — -for he was 
the priest of the Most High. These three texts 
are thus rendered by us : Whom heaven must 
receive — let us destroy the tree with the fruit there- 
of — and he was the priest of the Most High, {b) 
These texts are no more for or against the 
sacrament than a treatise of astronomy : yet we 
are accused of misconstruing them from preju- 
dice against it !" Softly, good Doctor ! There 
may be more in some of these texts than you 
seem to be aware of. Let us examine them 
separately. 

1st. Whom heaven must receive. In exhibit- 
ing this text, (to borrow the Doctor's expres- 
sion,) I fear he has had recourse to his favourite 
artifice, which I have exposed in the preceding 
section. He has suppressed the text, which 
Ward really condemns, and substituted in its 
place one which he approves. Ward did not 
condemn the corrected reading of the modern 
Bibles, which Dr. Ryan has exhibited : but he 
condemned the corrupted reading of the ancient 
Bibles, which the Dr. very prudently has for- 
gotten. That reading hath, whom heaven must 
contain ; a rendering which the correction, it 
has since received, sufficiently proves to have 
been false. But Dr. Ryan, by suppressing it, 
and substituting the corrected passage, states 

(a) Anal., p. 11. (b) Ibid., p. 12 



FOURTH EDITION. 3 

two advantages : he conceals the ancient corrup- 
tion from the eye of his reader, and represents 
Ward as a man of weak intellects, who could 
thus refer to the sacrament a text which has no 
relation to it. In the corrected copies I acknow- 
ledge it has not ; but in the more ancient it had. 
Ward had told us that it was so rendered by 
Beza, according to that reformer's own confes- 
sion, in order to exclude the presence of Christ 
from the sacrament ; and Dr. Ryan must have 
known that Protestant controvertists in England 
have often alleged the same text for the same 
purpose. Ward then was perfectly correct. 

2d, The second passage is very differently ren- 
dered in the Catholic and Protestant versions : in 
the former, Let us cast wood upon his bread .- 
in the latter, Let us destroy the tree with the 
fruit thereof. It must be acknowledged that 
the Catholic rendering is not conformable to the 
present Hebrew : 7»rfta y» nmrros. But then 
it is conformable to the more ancient ver- 
sions, the Greek, the Vulgate, and the Arabic, 
and the consent of these versions proves that 
the modern reading of the Hebrew is false, (c) 
The Protestant translators, on the contrary, 
have chosen to follow that reading, and accor- 
dingly have rendered 75 nmrros, let us destroy 
the tree ; but then, to make sense, they have 
been compelled to give to orb a meaning, 
which, I believe, it has not in any other part of 
scripture, and under yarfc the fruit thereof, 
instead of his bread. Ward, therefore, was 
justified in numbering this in his catalogue of 
errata. If it be asked why he placed it under 
the head of false translations against the sacra- 
ment, he answers because he suspected it to have 
been adopted in order to elude the force of a 
passage in the works of St. Jerom, who had re- 
ferred the original text to the holy Eucharist, (d) 

3rd. The difference in the third text, Gen. 
xiv. 18, depends on the meaning which ought 
to be given to the Hebrew particle ]. The 
Vulgate and the English Catholic version have 
rendered it for ; and that it is susceptible of this 
meaning is evident from the Protestant trans- 
lators themselves, who in similar passages have 
rendered it in the same manner. (Gen. xx. 3 : 
Thou art but a dead man for the woman which 
thou hast taken ; byo nj>$5 tnrr] for she is a 
man's wife. And Isaiah lxiv. 5 : Behold thou 
art wroth, nxms] for we have sinned.) In the 
present instance, they have rendered it and, 
which Ward ascribes to their wish to elude the 
argument that Catholic theologians had been 
accustomed to draw from Melchizedeck's typical 
sacrifice of bread and wine. 

Dr. Ryan proceeds to instance another text, 
which, as he vainly flatters himself, will yield 
him an easy victory. " In the Protestant trans- 
lation (Heb. x. 10,) it is said, we are sanctified 
through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ 
once for all." " Ward says that our translators 
added the words for all, to take away the daily 
oblation of Christ's body and blood in the mass. 

(c) It was probably frmOT in the more ancient copies. 

(d) Errata, No. II. 



4 PREFACE TO THE 

But it must be admitted that the compound 
Greek word, which Romanists render once should 
be rendered once for all ; only once and for a 
short time : that the words for all are improperly 
omitted in the Popish translations, and without 
serving the cause for which Catholics contend. "(a) 
He is an unskilful or an unfortunate champion, 
who cannot aim a stroke at his adversary with- 
out inflicting a wound on his friends. When 
Dr. Ryan condemns the Catholic, his censure 
bears still more heavily on the Protestant trans- 
lators : and he chooses to praise them at the very 
moment when they condemn him. The Greek 
word ecpcxTTaS occurs frequently in the New Tes- 
tament : (b) yet in no one instance can I discover 
that the Protestant translators have rendered it 
once for all, except in this passage, Heb. x. 10. 
If then, as the Doctor asserts, the words for all 
are improperly omitted in the Popish translations, 
I trust, he will acknowledge that they are also 
improperly omitted in the Protestant translations; 
and thus contribute his mite towards comple- 
ting Ward's catalogue of errata. The truth, 
however, is, that the Protestant translators, in- 
stead of thinking the words for all improperly 
omitted, were conscious that they formed no part 
of the sacred texts, and therefore printed them 
in italics, as an indication that they occurred 
not in the original, but were useful to form a 
right notion of the apostle's meaning. Thus is 
Dr. Ryan condemned by his own clients. But, 
continues the Doctor, " The term once without 
the addition of the words for all, would not jus- 
tify a daily oblation : for where we are sanctified 
through the offering of Jesus Christ once, it 
must be unnecessary to repeat it : it does not 
follow that, because Christ's body was offered 
once for sinners, it should be daily offered for 
them." (c) Is not this a controversial stratagem, 
a ruse de guere, to draw off the attention of the 
reader from the real state of the question ? Ward 
did not say that because Christ's body was of- 
fered once, it follows that it ought to be offered 
daily. He was not so weak a logician. But he 
did say, that the Protestant translators added 
the words for all, in support of their favourite 
doctrine that he was not to be offered daily : and 
I confess, I think he is not mistaken : for on no 
other ground can I account for their having 
added the words for all in this passage, and 
having omitted them in every other in which the 
Greek term ecpanaZ occurs. As to the assertion 
that, " where we are sanctified by the offering of 
Jesus Christ once, it must be unnecessary to 
repeat it," I beg leave to refer Dr. Ryan to the 
commentary of St. Chrysostom on this very 
epistle, a writer who probably understood the 
Greek language as well as modern translators. 
From that ancient father he will learn, that 
though Christ was offered once, and his offering 
sufficeth for ever, yet we offer him daily : but 
that it is one and the same sacrifice, because 
we offer one and the same victim. Ana% 
7Too(rr}vs%8t],' xai itg to aii ijqy.sos . . . ri ovv ; f[[iEtg 

(a) Anal., p. 12. 

(b) Rom, xi. 10 ; Heb, vii. 28 ; ix. 12. 

(c) Anal., p, 13. 



FOURTH EDITION. 

xad IxctOTTjv -fifiegav ov nqoacpsq6fiEv ; nqooq>EqofiEv^ 

dXX 6.Vtt[lVT}OlV nOlOVflEVOI, 70V OuVCtZOV 6.VXOV Xttl 

fiat loxiv (xvit] xon 6v noXXoti .... tov yaq &vtov 

&SI 7tQOO-(pSQO(lSV 6v VVV flEV BTEQOV, UVQIOV SbvTE- 

qov, aXV &si to avio. dors ftcu ioxiv \Tvaia. In 
Epist. ad Heb. c. ix. horn. xvii. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

THE BLESSED SACRAMENT, AND 
THE ALTAR. 

Dr. Ryan opens his remarks on this section 
in his usual maner. " Ward charges us with 
misrendering three texts ; this is a curious 
charge, when our last translation of two out of 
the three agrees exactly with the Popish ; and 
when we have no translation of the third." It 
will not be a difficult task to unravel the web 
of his sophistry. Ward did not charge the last 
but the more ancient Protestant translations 
with misrendering the three texts, and that his 
charge is true, is evident from Dr. Ryan's 
attempts to shift the question from one version 
to another. As to the assertion that there is no 
translation of the third ; it can only mean that 
by Protestants it is not accounted part of the 
inspired writings, but occurs in one of the books 
which they have classed among the Apocrypha. 
He proceeds thus : " Nor need our first trans- 
lators have been afraid of using the word altars ; 
as there is no evidence that the Popish altars 
resembled those of the apostolic age." Did 
ever writer trifle more egregiously with the 
judgment and the patience of his readers ? 
There is no evidence that the Popish altars re- 
sembled those of the apostolic age : therefore, the 
first Protestant translators need not have been 
afraid of using the word altars ! But is Dr. 
Ryan then willing to admit that Christians made 
use of altars as early as the apostolic age ? For 
what purpose did they make use of them ? It 
must have been for sacrifice : otherwise there 
could have been no more need of altars among 
Christians in the apostolic age, than among 
Protestants in the present. But if it were for 
sacrifice, that sacrifice would have been no other 
in substance than what Catholics call the sacri- 
fice of the mass. 

" The first Protestant translators need not 
have been afraid of the word altars .'" Why 
then did they substitute temple in its place 1 Dr. 
Ryan cannot here have recourse to his former 
plea of their ignorance of the original languages. 
The veriest smatterer in the Greek tongue 
could have informed them that dvaiacrjqiov meant 
not a temple but an altar. Their own conduct 
in falsifying these texts shows, that they were 
afraid of the word. For what but fear, and 
that too of a very urgent nature, could have 
impelled men, who had assumed the office of 
apostles, and whose existence as such depended 
on their reputation, to pollute that office, and 
hazard that reputation, by thus wilfully and de- 
liberately corrupting the sacred volumes ? 



PREFACE TO THE 

The truth is, the first teachers of Protestantism 
had reformed religion ; they found it also neces- 
sary to reform the inspired writings. They had 
created a scriptural church without a sacrifice : 
it was prudent to have an edition of the scrip- 
tures without any honourable mention of altars. 
Altars and sacrifice are correlative terms : the 
one naturally leads to the other. When the 
Christian saciifice was abolished, altars were 
unnecessary. They had, of course, treated them 
with every species of indignity, and were too 
cautious politicians to permit them to be com- 
mended in the scriptures. But after the lapse 
of a century, circumstances were changed : the 
generation which had witnessed the altars and 
the sacrifice of the Catholic worship, had passed 
away. A new race of men, with new habits 
and new prejudices, had succeeded, no danger 
could arise from the adoption of the term : and 
the word altar was silently permitted to resume 
its former place in the sacred writings. 

Before I close my remarks on this section, I 
must observe that Ward has noticed another cor- 
ruption of the text, which Dr. Ryan has thought 
it prudent to overlook. In 1 Cor. xi. 27, the 
apostle says, Whosoever shall eat this bread, or 
drink this cup of the Lord unworthily , rj mvn shall 
be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord : from 
which disjunctive proposition Catholic controver- 
tists have been accustomed to draw an argument 
in favour of communion in one kind. This is a 
matter of such notoriety that a divine like Dr. 
Ryan could not be ignorant of it. In the first 
Protestant Bibles this text was faithfully trans- 
lated : but in the more modern it has been cor- 
rupted by the substitution of the copulative 
particle and, for the disjunctive particle or : a 
substitution of which Ward most justly com- 
plains. Now, in what manner does Dr. Ryan 
defend it ? He is silent ; he does not even re- 
motely "hint that such a corruptinn has been 
noticed by his adversary. Is he then conscious 
of the fraud, but unwilling that it should come 
to the knowledge of his Protestant readers ? I 
fear this is the only consistent explanation, which 
his conduct will admit. It certainly is not 
manly : but it would, perhaps, be too much to 
expect that every writer should have the honesty 
to make confessions, which would go to crimi- 
nate himself. However, he may draw this 
lesson from it : that he, who stands in need of so 
much indulgence himself, should be cautious 
how he condemns with severity the imaginary 
blemishes, which he may fancy that he discovers 
in others. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

PRIESTS, PRIESTHOOD, AND HOLY 
ORDERS. 

On this subject Dr. Ryan observes : " Accord- 
ing to Ward we misconstrued six texts, by 
rendering the Greek word elder instead of priest : 
he says, we did so, lest the term priest should 
2 



FOURTH EDITION. 5 

reflect honour on the Catholic clergy." (a) 
Reader, consult Ward, and thou wilt find he says 
no such thing. Ward attributes the suppression 
of the word priest to the suppression of the 
sacrifice of the mass. Where there is no altar 
or sacrifice, there is no need of a priest. But 
Dr. Ryan has forged the reason which he here 
gives to Ward, as an introduction to the sarcasm 
against the Catholic clergy, which immediately 
follows it. " Elder," he also tells us, " is a 
more literal translation of the Greek word than 
priest, and presbytery than priesthood : so that 
the Protestant translators are not chargeable 
with a mistranslation of these words, (b) He 
will, however, allow me to ask, what kind of men 
they were, whom the sacred writers designate 
by the term nqea^vTeqoi 1 Were they not ministers 
of religious worship ordained for that purpose 
by the apostles 1 As a minister of the Estab- 
lished Church, he must answer in the affirmative. 
But if they were, what is the proper term 
by which such ministers are described in the 
English language ? Not only common usage, 
but the very language of the Church of England 
decides in favour of the word priest. If then the 
translators of the Bible meant to speak a 
language intelligible to their readers, they ought 
to have translated the Greek word priests and 
not elders. Were I to. request the favour of 
Dr. Ryan to translate the following Latin sen- 
tence : " Episcopus Londinensis cum majon 
civitatis et duobus ecclesiae presbyteris visitav.il 
universitatem Oxoniensem," would he prefer as 
more literal such a version as this : the overseer 
of London, with the greater of the city, and two 
elders of the church, visited the generality of 
Oxford 1 

He proceeds : " Ward asserts that these 
translators were so conscious, that their bishops 
had no grace to confer a sacred character, by 
the imposition of hands, that they put out the 
word grace and substituted gift in two passages 
of St. Paul." When will Dr. Ryan cease to 
deceive his reader ? No such reason, as he here 
relates, occurs in Ward. That writer ascribes 
the substitution of the term gift, to the doctrine 
which the reformers preached, that order was 
no sacrament, (c) Whoever is conversant with 
the sacred writings will agree with him that 
xagio-fta is not properly rendered, by gift. In 
scriptural language it always meant grace, or a 
supernatural gift. 

I cannot follow him through all his mistakes 
in this section. The last seems to prove that he 
had hardly looked at the book he pretends to 
refute. " We are charged," he says, " with 
mistranslating the Greek word signifying dea- 
con : though all the Protestant versions of it 
agree with the Popish without the slightest vari- 
ation !" (d) The truth, however is, that Ward 
does not charge them with mistranslating the 
passage in question, 1 Tim. iii. 12. He only 
notices that in this verse it was translated pro- 
perly : and yet in the fourth verse preceding it 

(a) Anal., p. 14. (c) Errata, No. V. 

(*)Ibid. id) Anal., p. 15. 



6 PREFACE TO THE 

was rendered in the more ancient versions, 
minister. He only wishes to know why the 
same word, with the meaning attached to it in 
the Greek, should in the short space of four 
verses be rendered by a different word in Eng- 
lish ? In itself this is not a matter of great con- 
sequence : but I thought proper to notice it to 
expose the artifices of Dr. Ryan, who can thus 
condescend to calumniate his adversary, that he 
may enjoy a short and dangerous triumph. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

THE AUTHORITY OF PRIESTS AND 
BISHOPS. 

I have joined these two sections together, 
because the object of both is in a great measure 
the same, to determine the propriety of trans- 
lating certain scriptural terms, according to 
their general acceptation, in profane rather than 
ecclesiastical language. The words bishop, 
priest, deacon, angel, though originally borrowed 
from the Greek, have for more than a thousand 
years been naturalized among us. The three 
former serve to denote persons raised to certain 
offices in the church: the last, one employed in the 
duty of the heavenly spirits. Their meaning is 
perfectly understood by every man who can speak 
the English language. But the English transla- 
tors, as if they had been making a version of 
some profane writer, rejected these terms, and 
employed others more consonant in their forma- 
tion to the meaning of the radicals, of which the 
Greek words are composed. Thus bishop, is 
rendered overseer ; the highest functionary in the 
church is denoted by a term, which in common 
language signifies a menial servant : priest is 
translated elder ; and we are gravely told of 
choosing and ordaining elders, as if any thing 
but time could in the strict meaning of the word 
make an elder : deacons are called ministers, a 
term which properly includes all the offices of 
the church : angels, messengers, a word which 
certainly does not give a very high notion of the 
dignity of the heavenly spirits. These innova- 
tions Ward condemns, and, I think, with much 
justice. He attributes them to the unsettled 
state of religion, when the first English versions 
were made. The reformers had demolished the 
ancient fabric : they had not agreed what to 
substitute in its place. It was therefore politic 
in them to exclude bishops, priests, and deacons 
from the scripture, that the people, who from 
habit had been accustomed to reverse these or- 
ders, might not conceive there was any founda- 
tion for them in scripture. From the words 
apostle and disciple, no danger was to be appre- 
hended. These therefore were suffered to 
remain. Though, had the translators followed 
any general rule, they also should have been 
metamorphosed into messengers and scholars. {a) 

(a) In the late Bibles the words Akxkovov and AyycW 
are sometimes rendered properly. 



FOURTH EDITION. 

In 1 Peter ii. 13, we read in the Catholic- 
version, Be subject.... whet her it be to the king, 
as excelling : in the Protestant, whether it be to 
the king, as supreme. Dr. Ryan observes, " the 
Greek word tineas %u signifies supreme as well as 
excelling ; so that it is not very material, which 
way it is rendered. "(b) It should, however, be 
observed that in the more ancient version, to 
afford some scriptural foundation for the king's 
claim to the title of head of the church, it was 
rendered, to the king, as the supreme head, a 
corruption which I trust Dr. Ryan will not have 
the temerity to defend. The rendering of the 
more modem Bibles is less objectionable, though 
it does not in my opinion exactly convey the 
meaning of the original to the English reader. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

THE SINGLE LIVES OF PRIESTS. 

" Ward," observes Dr. Ryan, " says we mis- 
rendered the following text of St. Paul : Have 
we not the power to eat and to drink — to lead 
about a woman, a sister, as well as the other 
apostles ? (1 Cor. ix. 5.) We render, a wife, a 
sister. The Greek word signifies wife as well as 
woman : so that our translators are not charge- 
able with misconstruing it." What idea Dr. Ryan 
may have formed of the duties of a scriptural 
translator, I know not : but the canon which 
he has here laid down, is, I conceive, most sin- 
gular in its nature, and mo3t pernicious in its 
application. There exists hardly a word in any 
language which is not susceptible of several 
different meanings : and of these meanings it 
appears that the translator of the scriptures is at 
liberty to select that which may please him best. 
Now I think, and I trust every rational man will 
think with me, that, when the signification of 
a word is determined, as it generally is by the 
context, the translator is bound to adopt that 
signification : and that, when it is not, he is not at 
liberty to select the meaning that may please 
him best, but ought to render the ambiguity of the 
text by an expression of similar ambiguity in the 
version : otherwise he does not offer a faithful 
copy of the original : he does not translate but 
interpret : he substitutes fallibility for infallibility 
and gives the surmises of his own judgment or 
prejudice in the place of the real words of the 
inspired writer. It is true that the Greek word 
yvvr) signifies wife as well as woman. It signifies 
wife in its secondary, woman in its primary and 
more general acceptation. Now, is there any 
thing in the context to fix it to its secondary 
meaning of wife ? Nothing ; so that the more 
ancient writers, whose judgment could not be 
biassed by controversial disputes, which did not 
arise till many centuries after they were laid 
in their graves, without hesitation translate it 
woman, and explain it of an unmarried woman. 
But even allowing it to be as probable that. St. 

(b) Anal., p. 17. 



PREFACE TO THE 

Paul meant a married, as that he meant an un- 
married woman, this probability should at least 
be preserved in the version, by the adoption of 
a word as equally susceptible of either meaning 
as the Greek word in the original. It should be 
translated a woman, a sister, or a sister woman, 
and not a wife, a sister, as in the Protestant 
translation. He who says, a woman, does not 
decide whether she were married or not : but he 
who says, a wife, determines the question at once, 
and by substituting that determination in place 
of the words of the apostle, corrupts the sacred 
volume, and deceives the credulity of his readers. 

The next text is thus rendered in the Catholic 
version : / intreat thee also, my sincere compan- 
ion : in the Protestant, my true yoke-fellow. As 
Dr. Ryan justly observes, " the two versions 
seems to be the same in substance." But it 
should be remembered, that the Protestant transla- 
tion was made for the use of the vulgar, and in the 
ears of the vulgar yoke-fellow sounds very much 
like wife- Now, why did the Protestant trans- 
lators act so very differently in rendering this 
and the preceding text 1 In the former for a 
word of doubtful meaning they gave us another 
of determinate signification : in this the meaning 
of the expression is evident, (we have Dr. Ryan's 
word for it,) and yet they render it by a term, to 
say the best of it, of very ambiguous signification. 
To solve the problem, Ward asserts that their 
object was to teach the people to look with a 
more favourable eye on the married clergy : and 
whoever reflects on the disputes which then di- 
vided the Christian world on that subject, will 
not think his opinion devoid of probability. 

The next text is Matt. xix. 1.1. Our Saviour, 
speaking of the virtue of continency, says : Not 
all, they take this uiord ; but they to whom it is 
gioen. The Protestant translation has all men 
cannot receive this word, save they to whom it is 
gioen. " A curious proof," remarks Dr. Ryan, 
" that we mistranslated to justify the maTriage 
of the clergy !" The Dr. may make light of the 
difference between the two versions : but I must 
be allowed to maintain that the Protestant read- 
ing is a most palpable corruption. It is confessed 
that the word cannot does not occur in the 
original : and it is evident that it cannot be added 
without changing the sense. It affords a ready 
apology to every slave to impure gratification. 
Though the Dr. asserts that there is little differ- 
ence between do not receive, and cannot receive, 
I think few of our readers are so prejudiced as 
not to admit the distinction between power and 
act. Every one must know, that men frequently 
do not perform actions, though they can perform 
them. In short, let me ask why the translators 
added the word cannot ? If it did not add to the 
meaning of the original, why was the addition 
made ? If it did. where was their honesty ? 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM. 
Of the mistranslations in the Protestant Bible 
a great number are owing to the peculiar opin- 



FOTJRTH edition. 7 

ions of their authors : and as these are now- 
forgotten, those are frequently overlooked. It 
was the favourite tenet of Beza, that the sacra- 
ments of the new and the sacraments of the old 
law were of equal efficacy ; and that the baptism 
of John was similar to the baptism of Jesus. 
Now there occurs a passage of contrary import 
in Acts xix. 3. In what, said St. Paul to the 
Ephesians. were you baptized? And they said, 
in John's baptism. Eta ti ovv efianTiadnrB ; bi 8s 
hrtov. Eia to Iwawa fiamio/uu. After which, 
they were baptized in the name of the Lord 
Jesus. Eta to ovo/ja ts Kvqis Irjau. To elude the 
force of this text, Beza translated : Unto what 
were ye baptized? Unto John's baptism: and 
explained John's baptis?n to be a metaphor ex- 
pressive of John's doctrine. (a) Beza's opinion 
was adopted by the English translators, and with 
it was also adopted his version : though in the 
fourth verse they render the same Greek words 
baptized in and not unto. By this conduct they 
have undoubtedly disfigured and corrupted the 
text. Of their readers the greater part are 
unable to affix to it any meaning at all : and the 
few that do understand it, are presented with 
an erroneous version. Ward then was correct 
in numbering this passage among the Errata. 
Dr. Ryan in its defence only alleges, that the 
difference between the Catholic and Protestant 
versions is too trivial to be noticed : " into, unto, 
you and ye ! .'" But I would have him to reflect 
that the change of a single syllable will fre- 
quently cause a very important change in the 
sense : and to recollect that the Catholic version 
reads in and not into, as he has thought proper 
to assert. 

In Titus iii. 5, the Apostle says that we have 
been saved " by the laver of regeneration, and 
the renovation of the Holy Ghost, whom he[Go&) 
has poured upon us." In this text, which 
evidently alludes to baptism, the Apostle clearly 
says that the Holy Ghost is poured upon us in 
that sacrament. But this did not coincide with 
the views of Calvin, who therefore boldly ren- 
dered diu /.ovtqov nalwysveatas, xai dvaxutrwascoc 
7iPsv/.iaiog &yiu, a ii-6%eev kq> fj/uug, per lavacrum 
regenerationis spiritus sancti quod effudit innos. 
The English translators reversed the authority 
of Calvin ; and therefore preferring his version 
to the words of the original, they also rendered 
it, by the fountain of the regeneration of the 
Holy Ghost, which he shed on us." If it be said 
that the relative which is ambiguous, and may 
be referred either to fountain or Holy Ghost, I 
ask, why, where the original is clear, did they 
prefer ambiguity? why did they select the veib 
to shed, which alludes rather to the fountain than 
the Holy Ghost, and why did they so scrupu- 
lously adhere to Calvin's version, as to suppress 
the very words which he suppressed ? In the 
modern English Bibles, the words originally 
suppressed, are indeed restored, an d fountain is 
changed into washing : but the ambiguous relative 
which, and the verb, to shed, are still retained. 
Dr. Ryan owns that the Catholic version is 
preferable. 

(a) Bez. annot. in Act. xix. 



PREFACE TO THE 



FOURTH EDITION, 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 

AGAINST 

CONFESSION AND THE SACRAMENT 
OF PENANCE. 

On this subject the point at issue between 
Ward and Dr. Ryan is the true meaning of the 
Greek verb /itsjavoeiv. According to the Doc- 
tor it implies sorrow for sin with a firm resolu- 
tion of amendment, and is therefore properly 
rendered by the Protestant translators to repent. 
According to Catholics, it implies not only 
sorrow and a purpose of amendment, but also 
an external demonstration of that sorrow by 
good works performed in a penitential spirit, 
such as prayer, alms, and fasting, of which nu- 
merous instances are recorded in holy writ. The 
Catholic translators have therefore rendered it, 
to do penance. Now, that their rendering is 
accurate I think clear : lstly, from some of the 
texts themselves, which mention bodily afflic- 
tion as an adjunct to the sorrow and amend- 
ment required. Thus we read, Matt. xi. 21, 
Luke x. 13, They had done penance [repented 
Prot. ver.) in sackcloth and ashes; 2ndly, from 
the ancient Greek ecclesiastical writers, who 
probably understood the real import of their 
own language as well as the Protestant transla- 
tors. Now those always style the performance 
of penitential works fiezavoia. Thus St. Basil, 
speaking of the prayers, the abstinence, the sack- 
cloth and ashes of the Ninivites, exclaims : 
Tognvrrj tj tuv (xftctDTiuig £ve%0[i8vup /nsravoia ;(a) 
3d, from the austerities to which in the ancient 
church public sinners were subjected, who were 
then termed 6t hv xi\ fxexuvota ovzea ; 4th from the 
translator of the Vulgate and the Latin fathers, who 
render it by " penitentiam agere." To these I may 
add Ausonius the poet in the well known passage, 

Sum Dea, quae facti, non factique exigo pcenas ; 
Scilicet ut poeniteat, sic fieravoia vocor. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

THE HONOUR OF OUR LADY AND 
OTHER SAINTS. 

I shall not dwell long on the texts enumerated 
under this head, as they are of minor importance. 
By Ward they were noticed with no other view 
than to show, how scrupulously anxious the 
Protestant translators were not to contaminate 
the orthodoxy of their version by any approach 
towards the language of Catholics. I shall give 
one instance. In Psalm cxxxix. 17, occurs the 
following passage : — Thy friends, God, are 
become exceedingly honourable : their princedom 
is exceedingly strengthened. In the Catholic 
service this text is applied to the saints ; a suffi- 
cient argument for its exclusion from a Protes- 
tant Bible. That the Hebrew word fan ori- 
ginally meant thy friends, and Ervroin their 

(a) St. Ba3. hom. in fame et siceitate. 



princedom, cannot be denied. They had been 
rendered so by the Greek translator, and the 
Latin translator, and the Syriac translator, and 
the Arabic translator, and the Ethiopic trans- 
lator, and the Chaldaic paraphrast. But then 
it was the misfortune of these writers to live 
before the reformation. Hatred of Popery had 
not disclosed to them all the mysteries of the 
Hebrew language. Our Protestant translators 
applied to the task ; and by the magic touch of 
their pen, the friends of God, and their prince- 
dom, were translated into the thoughts of God 
and their sum. " How precious are thy thoughts 
unto me, O God ! and how great is the sum of 
them." But this version, if it cannot lay claim 
to accuracy, has at least one advantage. It 
offers to the piety of the orthodox churchman a 
new subject of meditation, the sum of God's 
thoughts. Truly, if men are determined to 
corrupt the language of scripture, let them at 
least make it speak sense. To pervert it from 
its true meaning is guilt sufficient : to transform 
it into nonsense is a work of supererogation : it 
is more than is necessary for the support of or- 
thodoxy. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

THE DISTINCTION OF RELATIVE 
AND DIVINE WORSHIP. 

In Hebrews xi. 21, it is said of Jacob, nqo- 
oexwTjosv ent to uxoovirja Qafids avis : which in 
the Catholic translation is rendered, according 
to the Vulgate, adored the top of his (Joseph's) 
rod: in the Protestant, worshipped, leaning on 
the top of his staff. Among the ancient writers 
there were two opinions respecting the meaning 
of this passage, and that to which it alludes, 
Genesis xlvii. 31. St. Augustine expounded 
them to mean that Jacob adored God, leaning 
on his staff, and St. Jerom countenances this 
opinion by translating the Hebrew : " adoravit 
Israel deum, conversus ad lectuli caput." But 
the general opinion was, that Jacob in this 
instance directed his respect not immediately to 
God, but to his son Joseph. Those, however, 
who held thi9 opinion, were divided in their 
manner of explaining it. " He worshipped 
Joseph," says Theophylactus, " pointing out the 
worship of the whole people. But how did he 
worship ? On the top of his staff : that is, sup- 
porting himself on his staff on account of his 
age. But some say he worshipped towards the 
top of Joseph's rod, signifying by the rod the 
sceptre of the kingdom which would be after- 
wards worshipped." (b) Of these two opinions 
the former was adopted by Theodoret ; " Israel 
sat resting on his staff, and worshipped bending 

(A) TlporTCKWrJCTC T03 IwV£<p, Tt]V TTdVTOS T0\) \dOV TrpoaKVPlJGll. 

6r]\toi>' LTw<r <5c TTpootKVvrjtitv ; ztti to hupov Ti\a paatiov avrov, 
TovTtGTi v, txipeto&eio- 7ripa/3Sy 6*ia to yzpaa. Tivea 6e €?ri to 
aKpoiiTTio- pa0Sov tov Io)(T£0, fact, rrpoocKvyrjoc, O-TljiaiVOiV to ttjo- 
(iaaiXtiac unrjiTTpov ftta T-qry pa06ov irpouKvvr]Or)otaOai ptWov. 

Theophyl . in cap. xi. ad Hseb. 



PREFACE TO THE 

his head on his staff :" (a) the latter by St. Atha- 
nasius, who in quoting the passage inserts the 
words i5<8 &vi8 " the rod of his son ," (b) and by 
St. Chrysostom, who says, " though an old man 
he worshipped Joseph, foretelling the future 
worship to be rendered by the whole people." (c) 
In such diversity of sentiment no translator can 
be blamed for adopting either opinion. I would 
translate it, He bowed to the top of Joseph's 
staff. 

In Ps. xcviii. 5, it is said, according to the 
Catholic version, adore the footstool of his feet, 
because it is holy : in the Protestant, worship at 
his footstool, for he is holy. The former version 
is favourable to the exhibition of religious re- 
spect to creatures ; the latter does not necessarily 
exclude it. I do not, however, think that the 
Protestant rendering is accurate. The Hebrew 
phrase is applied in the scriptures to the true 
God, to imaginary gods, and to creatures : and 
the nature of the worship, which it denotes, is 
determined by the nature of its object. But the 
reformers had rejected that respect, which Ca- 
tholics allow on religious motives to be sometimes 
paid to creatures • and it was of course improper 
to permit any traces of it to be found in the 
sacred volumes. Thus the same phrase adopted 
different meanings at the will of the translaior : 
and the same preposition on one occasion pointed 
out the object of worship, at another excluded 
it : nr£ rrnrron tc?> is rendered, thou shall 
not bow down thyself to them : and Dfrtib lintran 
worship at his footstool. If in the former 
passage the Hebrew phrase means to bow down 
to, how comes it to mean to worship at, in the 
latter 1 I fear, that in this text, as in many 
others, the prejudices of the translators pre- 
vailed over their respect for the original. In 
the Catholic version we read, for it is holy ; in 
the Protestant, for he is only. The Hebrew 
text will bear either meaning. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

SACRED IMAGES AND AGAINST THE 
USE OF THEM. 

Among the different arts by which the apos- 
tles of the reformation contrived to inflame the 
animosity of their disciples against the Church 
of Rome, few were more efficacious than the 
clamour which they raised against the worship 
of images. According to the new gospel, 
every species of religious respect offered to 
inanimate objects was idolatrous : and to prove 
the truth of this doctrine, almost every page of 
scripture was improved by new denunciations 
of vengeance against images, and their worship- 

(ffi) Eica0£<T0>7 /?a/frtpio (5c Ki^prifitvoa ImcTrjpi^sre avrr). 
17 poaeKVvriaeii IrrtK^ivaa -ry pa0du> Tqv ise<j>a\riii. Theod. in 

Gen. interrog. 109, 
(4) Homil. in St. Patres, 11, p. 693. 

(c) Kat yepoiv oiv, fiSri TrpoaenvvYioc to Iajae^, rr\v rravroa rov 
Xaov npoaKW Tjaiv 6r]\uv rrjv eao\t£vriv avrco. Horn. XXVi. in 

epis. ad Heb. 



FOURTH EDITION. 9 

pers. No less than thirteen different words in 
the Hebrew, and nine in the Greek scriptures, 
were invariably rendered image in the English 
version : so wonderfully comprehensive is the 
meaning of that single word in orthodox lan- 
guage. Of the texts, which had been thus cor- 
rupted, two proved eminently useful. In 2 Cor. 
vi. 16, the Apostle was made to say : How 
agreeth the temple of God with images ? and this 
corruption furnished every iconoclast preacher 
with a most powerful text, when he urged the 
credulity of his hearers to deface the ornaments 
with which Catholic piety had been accustomed 
to decorate religious edifices. The other text 
occurred 1 John. v. 22, babes, keep yourselves 
from images ; and this, when the house of God 
had been purged from every trace of Popish 
idolatry, was constantly painted in large cha- 
racters within the door. Useful, however, as 
these texts have been, they no longer appear in 
the sacred volumes. They were suffered to 
effect the purpose of their authors, and then 
were directly consigned to oblivion. The same 
has been the fate of several others of similar 
import, as Dr. Ryan acknowledges : " but then," 
he adds, " having been corrected, Ward should 
not have inserted them in his list." "Why not ? 
Did they not originally exist in the Protestant 
version ? Were they not received by the people 
as part of the original text ? Undoubtedly. 
Ward then could not have omitted them without 
betraying the cause he had undertaken to 
defend. 

But though several of these texts have been 
corrected by men, whose more moderate ortho- 
doxy cold blush at the daring effrontery of 
their predecessors, Ward still complains that 
several are also left, which equally require cor- 
rection. In the Protestant version of the 
decalogue are read, thou shalt not make to thy- 
self any graven image, instead of graven thing. 
" But where," says Dr. Ryan, " is the difference ? 
When a thing is graven, it becomes an image, 
and a graven thing must, be the image of some- 
thing real or imaginary." (d) If the authors of 
the Protestant version reasoned in this manner, 
they deserved no less praise as logicians than as 
translators. Every graven thing must neces- 
sarily be an image, why, then I suppose every 
graven ornament is to be called an image, the 
pillars that adorn our porticoes will be images : 
even our houses of polished and ornamented 
stone must become images. That the Hebrew 
word in its original meaning denotes a graven 
thing, cannot be denied : and that it may some- 
times mean an image, I will allow. But in what 
sense does Dr. Ryan wish itto be taken ? If in the 
latter, yet from the context it is evident that it 
denotes an image to which divine worship is to 
be paid : and such an image in plain English is 
an idol. Thus it was rendered by the Greek 
translators, and thus it ought to have been 
rendered by the Protestant. But if he takes 
it in the former sense, the present rendering is 
also false : as it restrains the prohibition to 

(«!) Anal., p. 25. 



10 PREFACE TO THE 

images, whereas in the original it includes under 
the denomination of graven things, the columns 
of stones, which were the objects of worship to 
many of the ancient nations. 

In two other texts, Rom. xi. 4. ; Acts xix. 
35, it is acknowledged that image does not 
occur in the original. It has been preserved 
in the Protestant version as a memorial of the 
devotion which the reformed translators paid to 
this important word. It was their most useful 
auxiliary : and they have rewarded its services 
by still giving it a niche in the inspired writings. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

LIMBUS PATRUM AND PUPGATORY. 

On this subject, after a long preamble in 
which he shows but little acquaintance with the 
Catholic doctrine, Dr. Ryan calls on Popish 
divines to show that the twelve texts mentioned 
by Ward prove the doctrine or existence of the 
Limbus patrum or purgatory. But this is 
unnecessary in the present instance. The point 
to be determined is, whether the Hebrew word 
^ot denotes the grave, as it is rendered in the 
Protestant version, or the state of the soul after 
death, as it was understood by the Catholic trans- 
lators. Now, 1st, that it will admit of the lat- 
ter meaning must be acknowledged by Dr. Ryan 
himself: since in three instances to allow its 
insertion, the word grave has been expunged in 
the corrected editions of the Protestant Bible. 
2nd. The proper Hebrew term for the grave is 
•ep • nor can I find any proof that ^ot is 
ever employed in that sense in the scriptures, (a) 
In every passage in which it occurs, it will 
easily bear the meaning ascribed to it by the 
Catholic translators : in some it cannot bear 
that which is given to it in the Protestant ver- 
sion. Thus, when Jacob said, " / will go down 
into ^inib unto my son mourning ,-" he could 
not mean the grave. He certainly did not con- 
ceive Joseph's soul to have been buried : arid as 
few his body he could not expect to find it in the 
grave, as he believed it to have been devoured 
by wild beasts. In favour of his opinion Dr. 
Ryan adduces the Samaritan version in which 
this text, as he says, is rendered the grave. I 
fear, however, that, unable to read the Sama- 
ritan version itself, he has been deceived by the 
treacherous authority of its Latin translator. 
The Latin translator of the Samaritan version 
has indeed rendered Gen. xxxvii. 35, sepulchrum: 
but in the version itself we read, ^>r», which is 
evidently the same word as the Hebrew, and has 
the same meaning ; and which the same trans- 
lator in the parallel passages, Gen. xlii. 38 ; 
xliv. 29, 31, has rendered by the Latin word 
Inferi. 3rd. If modern Lexicographers give 

(«) In the passages usually refered to, 1 Kings xi. 6, 10, 
it is rendered a6 n <j, inferi, by the ancient translators.' 
They looked on InSip his old age, as a figurative ex- 
pression for him in his old age. 



FOURTH EDITION. 

both meanings to the Hebrew word, I can op- 
pose to their authority that of the ancient Greek 
and Latin interpreters, who as invariably render 
J>iniu <x()i]ff, inferi, infernus, as they do i^P, 
racfoo, fivrjjuu, sepulchrum. It is from them that 
the true meaning of this ancient language is to 
be learned. If, however, Dr. Ryan refuses to 
submit to them, I trust he will not reject the 
authority of St. Peter, who in Acts xi. 27, 
translates it cW?/<7, and in obedience to whom the 
correctors of the Protestant Bible have in this 
instance erased the word grave, by which it had 
been rendered in the more ancient editions. 

Dr. Ryan wishes to persuade his readers that 
Ward introduced the text from Heb. v. 7, as a 
proof of the existence of purgatory. Why 
should he thus misrepresent his adversary ? In 
discoursing of the foregoing texts. Ward had 
occasion to mention that article of the creed, in 
which Christians profess their belief in the de- 
scent of our Saviour into hell : and this had led 
him to censure the opinion of Calvin and Beza 
that the descent into hell was only a metaphorical 
expression, significative of the anguish of de- 
spair, and the horrors of damnation, which Jesus 
I felt on the cross. To countenance so blasphe- 
; mous an idea, the Protestant translators added 
their mite ; and in rendering that passage, in 
which St. Peter alludes to the prayer of Jesus 
on the cross, tell us that he was heard in that 
which he feared. The Greek is awoina ivlaljeutcr, 
which in the Catholic version is translated, 
he was heard for his reverence. What plea 
may be offered in defence of the Protestant 
rendering I know not. Dr. Ryan has offered 
none. I may therefore assume that it is inde- 
fensible. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

JUSTIFICATION AND THE REWARD 
OF GOOD WORKS. 

Dr. Ryan observes that the texts enumerated 
by Ward in this section were too obscure to 
induce the Protestant translators to misrender 
them. But this is shifting the question. The 
point in debate is not, whether these texts be 
obscure or not ; but whether they be fairly ren- 
dered in the Protestant version. Ward asserts 
they are not : and I think he has made out a 
pretty strong case. The Protestant translators 
were violent champions in favor of justification 
by faith only, and whoever consults this version 
will find that they had two sets of English words 
to express the Greek word Six-q and its deriva- 
vations. When they were united in the scriptures 
with the word faith, then they were rendered by 
just , justice, justification ; but if they were united 
with words expressive of the reward or practice 
of good works, just and justification disappeared, 
and righteous and righteousness were adopted 
in their place. If nothing unfair were meant, 
what motive could they have for this verbal 
legerdemain ? How comes it, that the same 



PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION. 



11 



Greek words should be cautiously rendered by 
two different sets of English words, and that 
these should be alternately adopted as they fa- 
voured the opinions of the translators, or were 
adverse to those of their antagonists. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

MERIT AND MERITORIOUS WORKS. 

In this section Ward produces five texts 
which, he maintains, have been falsely rendered 
in the Protestant Bible. In answer, Dr. Ryan 
compares these texts as they now stand, with the 
same passages in the Catholic version, and very 
gravely asks where is the difference ? But know, 
gentle reader, that he quotes from the amended 
version, in which the three principal corruptions 
have been corrected ; while Ward complains of 
the original translation. Such artifices are but 
sorry indications of the confidence which Dr. 
Ryan professes in the goodness of his cause. 

Of the remaining texts, one (Coloss. i. 12), 
according to the Catholic version, declares that 
God has made us worthy ; according to the 
Protestant, has made us meet to be partakers of 
the inheritance of the saints. The Greek is 
Ixavoauvxt, : and as the Protestant translators 
have rendered Ixuvoa worthy in Matt. iii. 11, 
and viii. 8, I see not why they should here have 
rendered it meet, were it not to avoid the Ca- 
tholic doctrine of merit. The other passage is 
in Ps. cxix. 112, in which -P3> is rendered for 
reward, by the Catholic ; unto the end, by the 
Protestant version. There is something very 
singular in the fate of this word. If in this 
passage the Catholic translator has rendered it 
for reward, in verse 33 of the same psalm he 
has rendered it always : and in like manner, if 
in this passage the Protestant translator has ren- 
dered it unto the end, in Psalm xix. 12, he has 
rendered it reward. In this confusion of ren- 
derings I should think it the most prudent to 
adhere to the ancient Greek interpreter, rather 
than the modern translators. He probably pos- 
sessed more accurate MSS-, and certainly was 
more intimately acquainted with the original 
language. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 



FREE WILL. 

Of the seven texts enumerated by Ward under 
this head, three, according to Dr. Ryan, have 
been corrected ; a sufficient proof that in the 
original Protestant version they were rendered 
corruptly. It will be easy to vindicate Ward's 
remarks on the remaining four. 

1st. The Greek text, 1 Cor. xv. 10, is sus- 
ceptible of two meanings : that the grace of 
God laboured alone, or that the grace of God 
and the apostle laboured together. The Pro- 



testant version, by inverting the words, " which 
was with me," appears to restrain the sense to 
the former meaning, and in that respect is not a 
faithful representation of the original. 

2nd. Romans v. 6, the apostle says that of 
ourselves we were uodsveiu, which the Protestant 
version renders without strength. The true 
meaning is weak : but weakness does not imply 
a total deprivation of strength. 

3rd. The Protestant version renders Ai kviolai 
dura fiaqsiai ax stair, 1 John v. 3, his command- 
ments are not grievous. Instead of grievous 
Ward contends we should read heavy- And 
that he is accurate will, I trust, appear by 
comparing this passage with that in St. Matt, 
xi. 30. 

4th. Matt. xix. 1 1 , is rendered in the Protes- 
tant, version : all men cannot receive this saying . 
Dr. Ryan acknowledges that cannot is an inter- 
polation, by proposing a different version of his 
own, in which that word is omitted. The trans- 
lators must have trusted much to the credulity of 
their readers, when they dared thus to add to 
the meaning of the original. Their disciples 
however, unconscious of the deception, prided 
themselves on their imaginary happiness ; and, 
while they derived new lights from the blunders 
and corruptions of the translators, wondered at. 
their former ignorance, and pitied the blindness 
of the slaves of Popery. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

INHERENT JUSTICE. 

Among the new doctrines sported by the apos- 
tles of the reformation, was that of imputative 
justice. No man, how virtuously soever he might 
have lived, could be just or righteous indeed, 
but only in as much as the justice or righteous- 
ness of Christ was imputed to him. With the 
merits or demerits of this opinion I have no 
concern : but among the texts by which it was 
assailed or defended, Ward has selected six, 
which he maintains to have been corrupted by 
the zeal of the Protestant translators. Dr. Ryan 
contents himself with replying very gravely, that 
neither do the Catholic versions prove, nor the 
Protestant versions disprove the contrary doc- 
trine of inherent justice. 

Of all the theological champions, with whom 
it has been my lot to be acquainted, Dr. Ryan 
conducts controversy in the most singular man- 
ner. Ward had asserted that in more than one 
hundred passages the Protestant version of the 
scriptures was corrupted : he noticed in detail 
every one of these corruptions, and subjoined 
to each the reasons on which he founded his 
charge. Then came Dr. Ryan, and undertook 
to rebut the accusations. But how does he 
proceed 1 Does he refute each of Ward's ar- 
guments ? No, he does not so much as mention 
them. A reader, who had perused none but 
Dr. Ryan's tract, would not know that Ward 
had a single reason to offer. The Doctor 



12 PREFACE TO THE 

throughout appears attempting to silence a dumb 
adversary, to conquer a man who makes no 
resistance. Now whence arises this conduct in 
Dr. Ryan ? Was he unwilling to refute Ward's 
argument ? But who can suspect of unwilling- 
ness in such a cause the self-created representa- 
tive of the Ryans, who lost so extensive a terri- 
tory by the papal grant of Ireland to Henry II. ? 
Was he unable to refute them ? I believe he 
was. However, let his reasons have been what 
they may, this is certain, that instead of answer- 
ing, he has passed over the arguments of Ward, 
as if he had never seen them. But to proceed 
to the texts in question. 

1st. The first is a passage of considerable ob- 
scurity, Rom. v. 18. By the Rhemish transla- 
tors it has been rendered with the most scrupu- 
lous and laudable fidelity, while the Protestant 
translators have undertaken to make it more 
clear by supplying such words, as they thought 
wanting. If Ward complain of these additions, 
it is probable that his complaint was not un- 
founded : since in the corrected editions they 
have been expunged, and their place has been 
supplied by other additions taken, as it appears, 
from the sixteenth verse. The alteration I 
think judicious : yet after all, it gives us not the 
words of the sacred texts, but only the conjec- 
tures of its Protestant translators. 

2nd. We are told in the Protestant version, 
Rom. iv. 3, that Abraham believed God and 
that it was accounted unto him for righteousness. 
What is the meaning of these last words, for 
righteousness ? Do they not imply the same as 
instead of righteousness ? Such, at least, is the 
rendering, and the explication of Beza, the 
master of our translators : pro justitia, i. e. vice 
et loco justitia;. Now I appeal to any man ac- 
quainted with the Greek and Hebrew languages, 
whether such can be the meaning either of St. 
Paul, ttbyiodn drva> tia dixaioo-vvnv, or of the 
writer of Genesis from whom the Apostle quotes, 
npns> room. 

3rd. In Ephes. i. 6, the Apostle says that 
God i-/aoixbiaBv rj/uag iv tq Tjyanrj/jevb). Ward 
has made it sufficiently clear from the ancient 
Greek writers, that exaQnwaev means, has made 
us agreeable or pie sing in his eyes. The Pro- 
testant translators have rendered it, has made us 
accepted. At first sight it may perhaps appear 
that the two renderings are nearly alike ; but a 
closer inspection will discover that the former is 
adverse, the latter favourable to the doctrine of 
imputative justice. Ward then was probably 
accurate in attributing this rendering to the pre- 
judices of the translators in favor of their own 
opinion. 

4th. The false translation of 2 Cor. v. 21, 
is corrected in the more modern Bibles. Who- 
ever consults Ward will see what unjustifiable 
liberties the original translators took with their 
text. But on this head Dr. Ryan is silent. He 
would fain persuade his readers, it is of the pre- 
sent and not of the ancient version that Ward 
complains. Such artifices are unworthy of a wri- 
ter, who is convinced of the goodness of his cause. 

5th. The two remaining texts, Dan. vi. 22 ; 



FOURTH EDITION. 

Rom. iv. 6, are noticed by Ward principally as 
instances of the horror which the reformers 
seems to have entertained for the word justice. 
That they might not pollute their pages with 
such a term, they have inserted innocency in the 
former, and righteousness in the latter passage. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
IN FAVOUR OF THE 

SUFFICIENCY OF FAITH ALONE. 

This section, like most others, offered Dr. 
Ryan a subject of imaginary triumph. Out of 
the six corrupt renderings noticed by Ward, he 
boasts that four have been corrected in the later 
editions of the Bible. He must be a weak adver- 
sary indeed, who can envy him such a triumph. 
I shall therefore proceed to the two remaining 
texts. 

Among the separatists from the Church of 
Rome at the period of the reformation, no less 
than among the separatists from the Church of 
England at the present day, it was a favourite 
doctrine, that justification bv faith consisted in a' 
full assurance of salvation. Whoever could work 
in himself this conviction, was secure of future 
happiness. His assurance was infallible; it would 
preserve him from ever falling, so as to forfeit his 
claim to the kingdom of heaven. Among the 
texts adduced in favour of this opinion was that 
of the epistle in the Hebrews, x. 22, with this 
difference, that former fanatics could only appeal 
to the assurance of faith of the ancient Protestant 
version, while modern fanatics may appeal to the 
full assurance of faith of the present amended 
edition. But does the original text, sv nlrjfjoqpoHf 
7iT(7rewf7, warrant such a rendering ? 1 have no 
hesitation in asserting, that it does not, and I 
found my assertion on the authority of those who 
could not have been ignorant of the true meaning 
of the Greek language, the ancient doctors of 
the Greek Church. By these the ni.tjQo<poQia 
max sua is said to be, a full and perfect faith, a 
faith that believes without doubting whatever 
God has revealed. Tavxa. says Theodoret, dxua 
£%siv moxEvovxea, xtti naaav di/ovoiav xrja yjv%t]a 
s^uqitpvisa. Toxo yaq Ttlr^ocpogiav s^aleaev.(a) 
It is, according to Theophylact, maxia nenXrjgu- 
ftevrj xai udioxaxcog. (&) 

The last text is Luke xviii. 43, Thy faith 
hath saved thee, instead of hath made thee whole. 
That this is a false rendering, is acknowledged. 
I shall therefore only ask, why it was first in- 
serted in the original version, and why it is still 
preserved in the corrected edition 1 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
AGAINST 

APOSTOLICAL TRADITIONS. 

On this subject I shall be content to refer the 
reader to the Errata, No. XVI., where he will see 

(a) Theod. in Ep. adHeb., c. x. (6) Theod. in eund. loc. 



PREFACE TO THE 

what reasons Ward had for censuring the Protes- 
tant translators ; and shall only notice Dr. 
Ryan's artifice in attempting to persuade us, that 
two of the five texts condemned by his adversary 
" agree with the Popish translation." What 
then ! did Ward accuse the Protestants of mis- 
translating, when they translated in the same 
sense as the Rhemish divines ? No such thing, 
Dr. Ryan meant to say, that the ancient ren- 
dering of the Protestant Bible in these two pas- 
sages was so evidently false, that it has since 
been corrected according to the Catholic trans- 
lation. Had he said this, he would have said the 
truth. 



MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES. 

On this head I shall notice the principal 
passages. It would fatigue the patience of the 
reader to go through them all, 

On marriage. " In the Popish version," 
says Dr. Ryan, " we read, this is a great sacra- 
ment : in ours, this is a great mystery. (Eph. v. 
22.) Ward allows that the word signifies mystery 
in Greek, and in Latin sacrament : surely then 
we are not chargeable with mistranslation. "(a) 
Never perhaps was there a more intrepid writer 
than Dr. Ryan ; never one who cared less for 
detection, or trusted more to the credulity of 
his readers. Does Ward then condemn the 
words, this is a great mystery, as a false transla- 
tion 1 On the contrary, he approves of it as a 
true one. But he condemned the original 
Protestant rendering, this is a great secret ; a 
rendering so very faulty that Dr. Ryan was 
ashamed to notice it, and therefore endeavoured, 
by calumniating his adversary, to keep it & great 
secret. 

On prayers in an unknown tongue. In 
1 Cor. xiv. the Protestant translators have 
added the epithet unknown in five different pas- 
sages ; and in answering this charge, Dr. Ryan 
very adroitly becomes the assailant, and accuses 
the Catholic translators of having omitted it in 
the same passages. What then 1 Does it occur 
in the original ? No ; but it is necessary to 
complete the sense. So Dr. Ryan may think ; 
but the apostle thought otherwise. He did not 
insert it ; and if he did not, I cannot conceive 
whence any translator can derive authority to 
insert it for him. If you will have the people to 
study their faith in the scriptures, let them at 

east have the scriptures as they were originally 
written. Let the stream flow to them pure from 

ts source, without the admixture of foreign 

natters. 

With respect to the texts, 1 Cor. xiii. ; 1 Cor. 
. 10 ; and 1 Tim. iii. 6, Ward's charges are 
Hrected against the ancient Protestant version ; 
and Dr Ryan charges him with misrepresenta- 
tion because these passages are corrected in the 
modern amended editions ! ! 

James i. 13. Let no man say, that he is 
tempted of God : for God is not a tempter of 



FOURTH EDITION. 13 

evil : and he tempteth no man. Instead of this 
the Protestant version reads, for God cannot be 
tempted with evil. Dr. Ryan has the modesty 
to assert that these two constructions are nearly 
the same ! (b) 



CONCLUSION. 

Dr. Ryan has repeatedly challenged the " Po- 
pish clergy" to reply to his analysis : he cannot 
be offended that I have accepted the invitation. 
If in the cause of my reply, I have shown that 
he has often adopted artifices unworthy a 
scholar and a divine ; that he was frequently 
misrepresented, and still more frequently con- 
cealed the arguments of his adversary, the blame 
must attach not to me, but to himself. He 
volunteered in the controversy : he must be an- 
swerable for the manner in which he has con- 
ducted the contest. 

Besides those parts of the Analysis which I 
have noticed, Dr. Ryan has offered some argu- 
ments respecting the Lambeth Register, and 
added answers to Ward's queries. With these 
I have no concern. My only object was to 
refute his remarks with respect to the Protestant 
version of the scriptures. As, however, it would 
be uncivil to take my leave without replying to 
these queries, which he has placed at the end 
of his pamphlet, I shall endeavour to do it as 
concisely and as satisfactorily as I can. 

The three first queries ask, how the Vulgate 
can be an infallible standard for other transla- 
tions ? I answer, that the Vulgate is a version 
deservedly of high authority, but I never yet 
met with a Catholic who considered it as infal- 
lible. 

Q. IV. Is the translation of the Bible respon- 
sible for the errors or excesses of Beza, or 
others, who had no hand in any of our versions ? 

A. It is not. Nor does Ward say it is. But 
many of the first translators were the pupils of 
Calvin and Beza, and it was not irrelevant to 
trace in the work of the masters the errors of 
their disciples. 

Q. V. Did the Protestant Churches ever pre- 
tend to be infallible in these translations or other- 
wise 1 

A. I know not whether they did or not. But 
this I know, they ought to have done so. 
Whence can a Protestant ignorant of the origi- 
nal languages, derive the knowledge of the 
Christian faith, but from the translation of the 
Bible ? If then, that translation be fallible, 
or manifestly erroneous, how can he have any 
security that his faith be true ? Built on an 
unsafe foundation, it can never acquire stability. 
The translation of the Bible must be infallible, 
or at least authentic, or the Protestant in 
question must always live in uncertainty. 

Q. VI. Did not the translators of the Bible 
of the year 1683 correct forty errors in our old 
ones ? 

A. The reformers of the old Protestant trans- 



(a) Anal., p. 40. 
3 



(b) Anal., p. 42. 



14 PREFACE TO THE 

lations did correct forty errors, and should have 
corrected forty more. 

Q. VII. Having adopted the very words of 
the Popish English Bible in very many in- 
stances, is it fair to charge them in every page 
with malice, design, and misinterpretation 1 

A. Ward does not often charge them with 
malice, design, and misinterpretation. His 
charges are principally levelled against the ori- 
ginal translators. He approves in many places 
of the conduct of the reformers of the Protes- 
tant version ; in some he condemns them, I fear, 
justly. 

Q. VIII. It always proves a bad cause to 
represent an opponent's argument as weaker 
than it is. Show where I exhibit Ward's objec- 
tions as less strong than they are ? 

A. In every division almost without exception. 
This I think I have sufficiently proved in the 
preceding pages. 

Q. IX. According to Ward, the apostles had 
a Christian doctrine, a rule of faith, before the 
New Testament was written ; prove that they 
had it 1 

A. If by a rule of faith Dr. Ryan means the 
thirty-nine Articles, I do not believe that the 
apostle had them either before the scripture was 
written or afterwards. But of this I am sure, 
that before the scripture was written the apos- 
tles preached the Christian doctrine, and estab- 
lished churches in which it was taught. I 



FOURTH EDITION. 

humbly conceive that they must have had a 
knowledge of it, and have imparted that know- 
ledge to their disciples. 

Q. X. Will not the Greek professor at May- 
nooth admit that the word iqianuS signifies once 
for all ? 

A. As I have not the honour to be acquainted 
with the Greek professor at Maynooth, I am 
unable to answer the question. 

Qs. XI. XII. XIII. XV. regard the meaning 
of Greek words. For answer I must request 
the reader to consult the preceding pages. 

Q. XIV. Was it not more decent in an 
apostle to lead about a wife than a strange 
woman ? 

A. I do not see how he could, unless he were 
married. Our blessed Redeemer was often 
attended by holy women of his kindred ; why 
might not an apostle also ? 

Q. XVI. The word naqaminfid signifies fault 
as well as sin. The Romanists render it sin : 
why may we not render it fault without being 
guilty of misconstruction 1 

A. I see no great sin in rendering naoanTu/iiti. 
fault, nor any great fault in rendering it sin. 

Q. XVII. Did not Adrian IV. grant Ireland 
to Henry II., and did not Alexander IV. confirm 
that grant 1 

A. Did not Dr. Ryan undertake to refute 
the " Errata," and has he not failed in almost 
every point ? 



THE AUTHOR'S PREFACE. 



Among the many and irreconcileable differ- 
ences between Roman Catholics and the secta- 
ries of our days, those about the holy scriptures 
claim not the least place on the stage of 
controversy : as, firstly, whether the Bible is the 
sole and only rule of faith 1 Secondly, whether 
all things necessary to salvation are contained 
in the Bible ? Or, whether we are bound to 
believe some things, as absolutely necessary to 
salvation, which are either not clear in scripture, 
or not evidently deduced out of scripture 1 
Thirdly, whether every individual person, of 
sound judgment, ought to follow his own private 
interpretation of the scripture ? If so, why one 
party or profession should condemn, persecute, 
and penal-law another, for being of that per- 
suasion he finds most agreeable to the scripture, 
as expounded according to his own private 
spirit ? If not, to what interpreter ought they 
to submit themselves, and on whom may they 
safely and securely depend, touching the exposi- 
tion and true sense and meaning of the same ? 
Fourthly, whence have we the scripture ? That 
is, who handed it down to us from the Apostles, 
who wrote it ? And by what authority we 
receive it for the Word of God ? And, whether 
we ought not to receive the sense and true 
meaning of the scripture, upon the same author- 
ity we receive the letter 1 For if Protestants 
think, the letter was safe in the custody of the 
Roman Catholic Church, from which they 
received it, how can they suspect the purity of 
that sense, which was kept and delivered to 
them by the same church and authority ? With 
several other such like queries, frequently 

[>roposed by Catholics ; and never yet, nor ever 
ikely to be, solidly answered by any sectaries 
whatever. 

It is not the design of this following treatise 
to enter into these disputes ; but only to show 
thee, Christian reader, that those translations 
of the Bible, which the English Protestant 
clergy have made and presented to the people 
for their only rule of faith, are in many places 
not only partial, but false, and disfigured with 
several corruptions, abuses, and falsifications, in 
derogation to the most material points of Cath- 
olic doctrine, and in favour and advantage of 
their own erroneous opinions : for, 

As it has been the custom of heretics in all 
ages, to pretend to scripture alone for their 
rule, and to reject the authority of God's holy 
church ; so has it also ever been their practice 



to falsify, corrupt, and abuse the same in divers 
manners. 

1. One way is, to deny whole books thereof, 
or parts of books, when they are evidently 
against them : so did, for example, Ebion 
all St. Paul's epistles ; Manicheus the Acts of 
the Apostles ; Luther likewise denied three 
of the four Gospels, saying, that St. John's is 
the only true gospel ; and so do our English 
Protestants those books which they call the 
Apocrypha. 

2. Another way is, to call in question at the 
least, and make some doubt of the authority of 
certain books of holy scriptures, thereby to 
diminish their credit : so did Manicheus affirm, 
that the whole New Testament was not written 
by the Apostles, and particularly St. Matthew's 
Gospel : so did Luther discredit the Epistle of 
St. James : so did Marcion and the Arians deny 
the Epistle to the Hebrews to be St. Paul's ; in 
which they were followed by our first English 
Protestant translators of the Bible, who pre- 
sumed to strike St. Paul's name out of the very 
title of the said Epistle. (a) 

3. Another way is, to expound the scripture 
according to their own private spirit, and to 
reject the approved sense of the ancient holy 
Fathers, and Catholic Church : so do all here- 
tics, who seem to ground their errors upon the 
scriptures ; especially those, who will have 
scripture, as by themselves expounded, for their 
only rule of faith. 

4. Another way is, to alter the very origi- 
nal text of the holy scriptures, by adding to, di- 
minishing, and changing it here or there for their 
purpose : so did the Arians, Nestorians, &c. and 
also Marcion, who is therefore called Mus 
Ponticus, from his gnawing, as it were, certain 
places with his corruptions ; and for the same 
reason may Beza not improperly be called, the 
Mouse of Geneva. 

5. Another way not unlike this, is to make 
corrupt and false translations of the scriptures 
for the maintenance of their errors : so did the 
Arians and Pelagians of old, and so have the 
pretended reformers of our days done, which 
I intend to make the subject of this following 
treatise. 

Yet, before I proceed any further, let me 
first assure my reader, that this work is not 
undertaken with any design of lessening the 

(a) See Bibles J 579, 1580. 



IQ THE AUTHOR 

credit or authority of the Holy Bible, as perhaps 
some may be ready to surmise : for indeed, it 
is a common exclamation among our adversaries, 
especially such of them as one would think 
should have a greater respect for truth, that 
Catholics make light of the written Word of 
God : that they undervalue and condemn the 
sacred scriptures : that they endeavour to lessen 
the credit and authority of the Holy Bible. 
Thus possessing the poor deluded people with 
an ill opinion of Catholics, as if they rejected, 
and trod under feet, the written Word : where- 
as it is evident to all, who know them, that none 
can have a greater respect and veneration for 
the holy scripture than Catholics have, receiving, 
reverencing, and honouring the same, as the 
very pure and true Word of God ; neither re- 
jecting, nor so much as doubting of the least 
tittle in the Bible, from the beginning of 
Genesis, to the end of the Revelations ; several 
devout Catholics having that profound venera- 
tion for it, that they always read it on 
their knees with the greatest humility and rev- 
erence imaginable, not enduring to see it pro- 
faned in any kind ; nor so much as to see the 
least torn leaf of a Bible put to any manner of 
unseemly use. Those who, besides all this, 
consider with what very indifferent behaviour 
the scripture is ordinarily handled among Pro- 
testants, will not, I am confident, say that 
Catholics have a less regard for it, than Pro- 
testants ; but, on the contrary, a far greater. 

Again, dear reader, if thou findest in any part 
of this treatise, that the nature of the subject 
has extorted from me such expressions as may, 
perhaps, seem either spoken with too much heat, 
or not altogether so soft as might be wished for ; 
yet, let me desire thee not to look upon them as 
the dictates of passion, but rather as the just re- 
sentments of a zealous mind, moved with the 
incentive of seeing God's sacred word adul- 
terated and corrupted by ill-designing men, on 
purpose to delude and deceive the ignorant and 
unwary reader. 

The holy scriptures were written by the Pro- 
phets, Apostles, and Evangelists ; the Old Tes- 
tament in Hebrew, except only some few parts in 
Chaldee and Syriac ; the greater part of the 
New Testament was written in Greek, St. 
Matthew's Gospel in Hebrew, and St. Mark's 
in Latin. We have not at this day the original 
writings of these Prophets and Apostles, nor of 
the seventy interpreters, who translated the Old 
Testament into Greek, about 300 years before 
the coming of Christ ; we have only copies ; for 
the truth and exactness whereof we must rely 
upon the testimony and tradition of the church, 
which in so important a point God would never 
permit to err : so that we have not the least 
doubt, but the copy authorised and approved of 
by the church is sufficiently authentic. For 
what avails it for a Christian to believe that 
scripture is the Word of God, if he be uncertain 
which copy and translation is true ? Yet, not- 
withstanding the necessity of admitting some 
true authentic copy, Protestants pretend that 
there is none authentic in the world ; as may 



t's PREFACE. 

be seen in the preface to the Tigurine edition of 
the Bible, and in all their books of controversy ; 
seeing therein they condemn the council of 
Trent, for declaring that the old translation is 
authentic, and yet themselves name no other for 
such. And, therefore, though the Lutherans 
fancy Luther's translation ; the Calvinists, that 
of Geneva ; the Zuinglians, that of Zuinglius ; 
the English, sometimes one, and sometimes 
another : yet because they do not hold any one 
to be authentic, it follows, from their excep- 
tions against the infallibility of the Roman Ca- 
tholic Church in declaring or decreeing a true 
and authentic copy of scripture, and their con- 
fession of the uncertainty of their own transla- 
tions, that they have no certainty of scripture at 
all, nor even of faith, which they ground upon 
scripture alone. 

That the Vulgate of the Latin is the most true 
and authentic copy, has been the judgment of 
God's Church for above those 1300 years ; dur- 
ing which time, the Church has always used it ; 
and therefore it is, by the sacred council (a) of 
Trent, declared authentic and canonical in every 
part and book thereof. 

Most of the Old Testament, as it is in the said 
Latin Vulgate, was translated (b) out of Hebrew 
by St. Hierom, or St. Jerom ; and the New-Tes- 
tament had been before his time translated out of 
Greek, but was by him (c) reviewed ; and such 
faults as had crept in by the negligence of the 
transcribers, were corrected by him by the ap- 
pointment of Pope Damasus. " You constrain 
me," says he, " to make a new work of an old, 
that I, after so many copies of the scriptures 
dispersed through the world, should sit as a 
certain judge, which of them agree with the true 
Greek. I have restored the New Testament to 
the truth of the Greek, and have translated the 
old according to the Hebrew. Truly, I will 
affirm it confidently, and will produce many 
witnesses of this work, that I have changed 
nothing from the truth of the Hebrew," &c. (b) 
And for sufficient testimony of the sincerity of 
the translator, and commendations of his trans- 
lation, read these words of the great Doctor St. 
Augustin : " There was not wanting," says he, 
" in these our days, Hierom, the priest, a man 
most learned and skilful in all the three tongues ; 
who not from the Greek, but from the Hebrew, 
translated the same scriptures into Latin, whose 
learned labour the Jews yet confess to be 
true." (e) 

Yea, the truth and purity of this translation 
is such, that even the bitterest of Protestants 
themselves are forced to confess it to be the 
best, and to prefer it before all others, as also 
to acknowledge the learning, piety, and sincerity 
of the translator of it ; which Mr. Whitaker, 
notwithstanding his railing in another place, 

(a) Con. Trident., Sess. 4. 

(b) S. Hierom. in lib. de Viris Illustr. extremo, et in 
Praefat. librorum quos Latinos fecit. 

(c) Hier. Ep. 89. ad Aug., quaest. 1], inter Ep. Aug. 

(d) See his preface before the New Testament, dedica- 
ted to Pope Damasus, and his Catalogue in fine. 

(e) S. Aug. de Civit. Dei. lib. 18, c. 43, et Ep. 80, ad 
I Hierom c. 3, et lib. 2, Doct. Christi, c. 15. 



THE AUTHOR'S PREFACE. 



17 



does in these words : " St. Hierom, I reverence ; 
Damasus, I commend ; and the work I confess 
to be godly and profitable to the church." (a) 

Dr. Dove says thus of it : " We grant it fit, 
that for uniformity in quotations of places, in 
schools and pulpits, one Latin text should be 
used : and we can be contented, for the antiquity 
thereof, to prefer that (the Vulgate) before all 
other Latin books." (b) 

And for the antiquity of it Dr. Covel tells 
us, " that it was used in the church 1300 years 
ago :" not doubting to prefer that translation 
before others, (c). 

Dr. Humphrey frees St. Hierom, both from 
malice and ignorance in translating, in these 
words : " The old interpreter was much addicted 
to the propriety of the words, and indeed with 
too much anxiety, which I attribute to religion, 
not to ignorance." (d) 

In regard of which integrity and learning, 
Molinceus signifies his good esteem thereof, 
saying, (e) " I cannot easily forsake the vulgar 
and accustomed reading, which also I am accus- 
tomed earnestly to defend :" " Yea, (/) I prefer 
the vulgar edition, before Erasmus's, Bucer's, 
Bullinger's, Brentius's, the Tigurine transla- 
tion ; yea, before John Calvin's, and all others." 
How honourably he speaks of it ! And yet, 

Conradus Pellican, a man commended by 
Bucer, Zuinglius, Melancthon, and all the fa- 
mous Protestants about Basil, Tigure, Berne, 
&c, gives it a far higher commendation, in 
these words : (g) " I find the vulgar edition of 
the Psalter to agree for the sense, with such 
dexterity, learning, and fidelity of the Hebrew, 
that I doubt not, but the Greek and Latin inter- 
preter was a man most learned, most godly, and 
of a prophetical spirit." Which certainly are 
the best properties of a good translator. 

In fine, even Beza himself, one of the great- 
est of our adversaries, affords this honourable 
testimony of our vulgar translation : " I con- 
fess," says he, " that the old interpreter seems 
to have interpreted the holy books with won- 
derful sincerity and religion. The vulgar 
edition I do, for the most part, embrace and pre- 
fer before all others." (/«) 

You see, how highly our Vulgate in Latin is 
commended by these learned Protestants : see 
likewise, how it has been esteemed by the an- 
cient (i) Fathers ; yet, notwithstanding, all this is 
not sufficient to move Protestants to accept or 
acquiesce in it ; and doubtless the very reason 
is, because they would have as much liberty to 
reject the true letter, as the true sense of scrip- 
tures, their new doctrines being condemned by 
both. For had they allowed any one translation 

(a) Whitaker in his Answer to Reynolds, p. 241. 

(b) Dove's Persuasion to Recusants, p. 16. 

(c) See Dr. Covel's Answer to Burges, pp. 91, 94. 

(d) Dr. Hum. de Ratione Interp., lib. 1. pp. 74. 

(e) Molin. in Nov. Test.. Part. 30. 
(/) Et in luc. 17. 

(g) Pellican in Prasfat. in Psalter. An 1584. 

(h) Beza in Annot . in Luc . i . 1 . Et in Praefat. Nov. Test. 

(i) S. Hierom et St. Aug.supr.; St. Greg., lib. 70.; Mor. 
c. 23. ; Istdor., lib. 6. Etym. c. 5, 7, et de Divin. Offic. 
lib. 1, cap. 12 ; S. Beda in Martyrol. Cassiod. 21 Inst. &c. 



to have been authentic, they certainly could 
never have had the impudence so wickedly to 
have corrupted it, by adding, omitting, and 
changing, which they could never have pre- 
tended the least excuse for, in any copy by 
themselves held for true and authentic. 

Obj. But however, their greatest objection 
against the Vulgate Latin is, that we ought ra- 
ther to have recourse to the original languages, 
the fountains of the Hebrew and Greek, in 
which the scriptures were written by the Pro- 
phets and Apostles, who could not err, than to 
stand to the Latin translations, made by divers 
interpreters, who might err. 

Ans. When it is certain, that the originals or 
fountains are pure, and not troubled or corrupt, 
they are to be preferred before translations : 
but it is most certain, that they are corrupted 
in divers places, as Protestants themselves are 
forced to acknowledge, and as it appears by 
their own translations. For example, Ps. xxii. 
ver. 1 6, they translate, " They pierced my hands 
and my feet :" whereas, according to the He- 
brew that now is, it must be read : " As a lion, 
my hands, and my feet;" which no doubt, is not 
only nonsense, but an intolerable corruption of 
the latter Jews against the passion of our Sa- 
viour, of which the old authentic Hebrew was 
a most remarkable prophecy. Again, according 
to the Hebrew, it is read, (k) Achaz, king of 
Israel ; which being false, they in some of their 
first translations read, Achaz, king of Juda, ac- 
cording to the truth, and as it is in the Greek 
and Vulgate Latin. Yet, their Bible of 1 579, as 
also their last translation, had rather follow the 
falsehood of the Hebrew against their own 
knowledge, than to be thought beholden to the 
Greek and Latin in so light a matter. Likewise, 
where the Hebrew says, Zedecias, Joachin's 
brother, they are forced to translate Zedecias, his 
father's brother, as indeed the truth, is according 
to the Greek. (I) So likewise in another place, 
where the Hebrew is, " He begat Azuba his wife 
and Jerioth;" which they not easily knowing what 
to make of, translate in some of their Bibles," He 
begat Azuba of his wife Jerioth ; and in others, 
" He begat Jerioth of his wife Azuba." But with- 
out multiplying examples, it is sufficiently known 
to Protestants, and by them acknowledged, how 
intolerably the Hebrew fountains and originals 
are by the Jews corrupted : amongst others, Dr. 
Humphreysays, "The Jewish superstition, how 
many places it has corrupted, the reader may ea- 
sily find out and judge." (m) And in another place, 
" I look not," says he. " that men should too 
much follow the Rabbins, as many do ; for those 
places, which promise and declare Christ the 
true Messias, are most filthily depraved by 
them." (n) 

" The old interpreter," says another Pro- 
testant, " seems to have read one way, whereas 
the Jews now read another ! which I say, be- 
cause I would not have men think this to 



(k) 2 Chron. xxviii. 19. 

(2) 4 Kings xxiv. 17, 19. 

(m) Humph. 1. I. de Rat. interp. p. 

(») Lib. ii. p. 219. 



178. 



18 



THE AUTHOR'S PREFACE. 



have proceeded from the ignorance or slothful- 
ness of the old interpreter : rather we have cause 
to find fault for want of diligence in the antiqua- 
ries, and faith in the Jews ; who, both before 
Christ's coming and since, seem to be less careful 
of the Psalms, than of their Talmudical songs." (a) 

I would gladly know of our Protestant trans- 
lators of the Bible, what reasons they have to 
think the Hebrew fountain they boast of so pure 
and uncorrupt, seeing not only letters and sylla- 
bles have been mistaken, texts depraved, but 
even whole books of the Prophets utterly lost 
and perished ? How many books of the ancient 
Prophets, sometime extant, are not now to be 
found ? We read in the old Testament, of a 
Liber bellorum Domini, " The Book of the Wars 
of our Lord ; the Book of the Just Men 
(Protestants call it the Book of Jasher;)the 
Book of Jehu the son of Hanani ; the Books of 
Setneias the Prophet, and of Addo the Seer ; 
and Samuel wrote in a book the law of the 
kingdom, how kings ought to rule, and laid it 
up before our Lord : and the works of Solomon 
were written in the Book of Nathan the Pro- 
phet, and in the Books of Ahias the Shilonite, 
and in the Vision of Addo the Seer." (b) With 
several others, which are all quite perished : yea, 
and perished in such time, when the Jews were 
" the peculiar people of God," and when, of all 
nations, " they were to God a holy nation, a 
kingly priesthood :" and now, when they are no 
national people, have no government, no king, 
no priest, but are vagabonds upon the earth, and 
scattered among all people : may we reasonably 
think their divine and ecclesiastical books to have 
been so warily and carefully kept, that all and 
every part is safe, pure, and incorrupt ? that every 
parcel is sound, no points, tittles, or letters lost, 
or misplaced, but all sincere, perfect and absolute? 

How easy is it, in Hebrew letters, to mistake 
sometimes one for another, and so to alter the 
whole sense ? As, for example, this very letter 
vau ior jod, (c) has certainly made disagreement 
in some places ; as where the Septuagint read, 
to xguiocr //S tuQog as cpulaSai, Fortitudinem meam 
ad te custodiam, " My strength I will keep to 
thee ;" which reading St. Hierom also followed. 
It is now in the Hebrew ?Y< fortitudinem ejus, 
" His strength I will keep to thee." (d.) Which 
corruptions our last Protestant translators fol- 
low, reading, " Because of his strength will I 
wait upon thee ;" and to make sense of it they 
add the words, " because of," and change the 
words, " keep to" into " wait upon," to the great 
perverting of the sense and sentence. A like 
error is that in Gen. iii. (if it be an error, as 
many think it is none,) Ipsa conteret caput tuum, 
for Ipse or Ipsum, about which Protestants keep 
up such a clamour, (e) 

As the Hebrew has been by the Jews abused 

(a) Conrad. Pell. Tom. 4, in Psal. lxxxv. 9. 
(*) Numb. xxi. 14 ; Josh. x. 13 ; Kings i. 18 ; 2 Paral. 
xx. 34 ; xii. 15 ; 1 Kings x. 25 ; 2 Paral. ix. 29. 

(c) ■'■pntt sin. 

(d) Psal. lviii. 10, in Prot. Bible it is Psa 1 . lix.9. 

(e) Gen. iii. 15. 



and falsified against our blessed Saviour Christ 
Jesus, especially in such places as were manifest 
prophecies of his death and passion, so likewise 
has the Greek fountain been corrupted by the 
eastern heretics, against divers points of Chris- 
tian doctrine, insomuch that Protestants them- 
selves, who pretend so great veneration for it, 
dare not follow it in many places, but are forced 
to fly to our Vulgate Latin, as is observed in 
the preface to the Rhemish Testament ; where 
also you may find sufficient reasons why our 
Catholic Bible is translated into English rather 
from the Vulgate Latin than from the Greek. 

To pass by several examples of corruptions 
in the Greek copy, which might be produced, I 
will only, amongst many, take notice of these 
two following rash and inconsiderate additions ; 
first, John viii. 59, after these words, Exivit e 
templo, " Went out of the temple ;" are added, 
Transiens per medium eorum, sic prmtcriit ; 
" Going through the midst of them, and so 
passed by." (f) Touching which addition, Beza 
writes thus : " These words are found in 
very ancient copies ; but I think, as does Eras- 
mus, that the first part, ' going through the 
midst of them,' is taken out of Luke iv. 30, and 
crept into the text by fault of the writers, who 
found that written in the margin : and that 
the latter part, ' and so passed by,' was added 
to make this chapter join well with the next. 
And I am moved thus to think, not only because 
neither Chrysostom nor Augustine (he might 
have said, nor Hierom) make any mention of 
this piece, but also, because it seems not to 
hang together very probably ; for, if he withdrew 
himself out of their sight, how went he through 
the midst of them ?" &c. (g) Thus Beza dis- 
putes against it ; for which cause, I suppose, it 
is omitted by our first English translators, who 
love to follow what their master Beza de- 
livers to them in Jjatin, though forsooth they 
would have us think they followed the Greek 
most precisely ; for in their translations of the 
year 1561, 1562, 1577, 1579, they leave it out, 
as Beza does ; yet in their Testament of 1580, 
as also in this last translation (Bible 1683), they 
put it in with as much confidence, as if it had 
neither been disputed against by Beza, nor 
omitted by their former brethren. 

To this we may also join that piece which 
Protestants so gloriously sing or say at the end 
of the Lord's Prayer, " For thine is the king- 
dom, the power, and the glory, for ever and ever, 
Amen," which not only Erasmus dislikes, (h) 
but Bullinger himself holds it for a mere 
patch sowed to the rest, " by, he knows not 
whom ;" (i) and allows well of Erasmus's judg- 
ment, reproving Laurentius Valla for finding 
fault with the Latin edition, because it wants it : 
" There'is no reason," says he, " why Laurentius 
Valla should take the matter so hotly, as though 
a great part of the Lord's Prayer were cut 

{.f) Aie'SSdiv Sia fiecit dvruiv ttat irapriyzv Svais- 

(g) Beza in Joh. viii. 59. 

(A) Erasm. in Annot. 

(i) Bullinger, Decad. v. Serm, 5. 



THE AUTHOR' 

away : rather their rashness was to be reproved, 
who durst presume to piece on their toys unto 
the Lord's Prayer." 

Let not my reader think that our Latin Vul- 
gate differs from the true and most authentic 
Greek copies, which were extant in St. Hierom's 
days, but only from such as are now extant, and 
since his days corrupted. " How unworthily," 
says, Beza, " and without cause, does Erasmus, 
blame the old interpreter, as dissenting from the 
Greek ! He dissented, I grant, from those 
Greek copies which Erasmus had gotten ; but 
we have found not in one place, that the same 
interpretation which he blames, is grounded on 
the authority of other Greek copies, and those 
most ancient : yea in some number of places we 
have observed that the reading of the Latin 
text of the old interpreter, though it agree not 
sometimes with our Greek copies, yet it is much 
more convenient, for that it seems to follow some 
truer and better copy." (a) 

Now, if our Latin Vulgate be framed exactly, 
though not to the vulgar Greek examples now 
extant, yet to more ancient and perfect copies ; 
if the Greek copies have many faults, errors, 
corruptions, and additions in them, as not only 
Beza avouches, but as our Protestant translators 
confess, and as evidently appears by their leav- 
ing the Greek and following the Latin, with what 
reason can they thus cry up the fountains and 
originals, as incorrupt and pure ? With what 
honesty can they call us from our ancient vulgar 
Latin, to the present Greek, from which them- 
selves so licentiously depart at pleasure, to fol- 
low our Latin ? (b) 

Have we not great reason to think, that as 
the Latin Church has been ever more constant 
in keeping the true faith than the Greek, so it 
has always been more careful in preserving the 
scriptures from corruption? 

Let Protestants only consider, whether it be 
more credible, that St. Hierom, one of the 
greatest doctors of God's church, and the most 
skilful in the languages wherein the scripture 
was written, who lived in the primitive times, 
when perhaps some of the original writings of 
the Apostles were extant, or at least the true 
and authentic copies in Hebrew and Greek 
better known than they are now ; let us then 
consider, I say, whether is more credible, than 
a translation made or received by this holy doc- 
tor, and then approved of by all the world, and 
ever since accepted and applauded in God's 
church, should be defective, false, or deceitful ? 
or that a translation made since the pretended 
Reformation, not only by men of scandalous, 
and notoriously wicked lives, but from copies 
corrupted by Jews, Arians, and other Greek here- 
tics, should be so ? (c) 

In vain, therefore, do Protestants tell us, 
that their translations are taken immediately 

(a) Beza in Praefat. Nov. Test., Anno 1556. 

(b) See the Praef. to the Rhemish Testament; Dr. Mar- 
tin's Discovery ; Reynold's Refutation of Whitaker, 
cap. xiii. 

(c) Such were Luther, Calvin, Beza, Bucer, Cranmer, 
Tyndal, &c. 



s preface. 19 

from the fountains of the Greek and Hebrew ; 
so is also our Latin Vulgate ; only with this dif- 
ference, that ours was taken from the fountains 
when they were clear, and by holy and learned 
men, who knew which were the crystal waters, 
and true copies ; but theirs is taken from foun- 
tains troubled by broachers of heresies, self- 
interested and time-serving persons ; and after 
that the Arians, and other heretics, had, I say, 
corrupted and poisoned them with their false 
and abominable doctrines. 

Obj. 2. Cheminitius and others yet further 
object, that there are some corruptions found 
in the Vulgate Latin, viz., that these words, 
Ipsa conteret caput tuurn, (d) are corrupted, 
thereby to prove the intercession of the Blessed 
Virgin Mary ; and that instead thereof, we 
should read Ipsum conteret caput tuum, seeing it 
was spoken of the seed, which was Christ, as 
all ancient writers teach. 

Ans. Some books of the Vulgate edition have 
Ipsa, and some others Ipse ; and though many 
Hebrew copies have Ipse, yet there want not 
some which have Ipsa : and the points being 
taken away, the Hebrew word may be translated 
Ipsa : yea the holy fathers (e) St. Augustine, 
St. Ambrose, St. Chrysostom, St. Gregory, 
St. Bede, &c, read it Ipsa, and I think we 
have as great reason to follow their interpreta- 
tion of it as Cheminitius's, or that of the Pro- 
testants of our days ; and though the word con- 
teret in the Hebrew is of the masculine gender, 
and so should relate to Semen, which also in 
the Hebrew is of the masculine gender, yet it is 
not rare in the scriptures to have pronouns and 
verbs of the masculine gender, joined with nouns 
of the feminine, as in Ruth i. 8 ; Esther i. 20 ; 
Eccles. xii. 5. The rest of Cheminitius's cavils 
you will find sufficiently answered by the 
learned Cardinal Bellarmine, lib. ii. de Verb, 
Dei, cap. 12, 13, 14. 

Again, Mr. Whitaker condemns us for follow- 
ing our Latin Vulgate so precisely, as thereby 
to omit these words, (_f ) " when this corruptible 
shall have put on incorruption," which are in the 
Greek exemplars, but not in our Vulgate Latin : 
whence it follows assuredly, says he, " that 
Hierom dealt not faithfully here, or that his 
version was corrupted afterwards." 

I answer to this, with Dr. Reynolds, (g) that 
this omission (if it be any) could not proceed 
from malice or design, seeing there is no loss or 
hindrance to any part of doctrine, by reading it 
as we read ; for the self-same thing is most 
clearly set down in the very next lines before. 
Thus stand the words : " For this corruptible, 
must do on incorruption ; and this mortal, do on 
immortality : and when this (corruptible, has 
done on incorruption, and this) mortal has done 

(d) Gen. iii. 

(e) St. August. , lib. 2, de Gen. cont. Manich., c. xviii. 1. 
11, de Gen. ad Literam, cap. xxxvi. ; St. Ambr. lib. de 
Fuga Sreculi, cap. vii.; St. Chrysost. in Horn. 17, in Gen. 
St. Greg. lib. i.; Mor. cap. xxxviii.; Beda et alii in hunc 
locum. 

( / ) 1 Cor. xv. 54. 

(«•) See Dr. Reynolds' Refutation of Whitaker's Re- 
prehensions, chap. x. 



20 THE AUTHOR'! 

on immortality." Where you see the words, 
which 1 have put down, inclosed with paren- 
thesis, are contained most expressly in the fore- 
going sentence, which is in all our Testaments ; 
so that there is no harm or danger either to 
faith, doctrine, or manners, if it be omitted. 

That it was of old in some Greek copies, as 
it stands in our Vulgate Latin, is evident by St. 
Hierom's translating it thus : and why ought St. 
Hierom to be suspected of unfaithful dealing, see- 
ing he put the self-same words and sense in the 
next lines immediately preceding ? And that it 
was not corrupted since, appears by the common 
reading of most men, in all after ages. St. Am- 
brose, in his commentary upon the same place 
reads as we do. So does St. Augustine, De Ci- 
vitate Dei, cited by St. Bede, in his commentary 
upon the same chapter, (a) So read also the rest 
of the Catholic interpreters, Haymo, Anselm, &c. 

But if this place be rightly considered, so far 
is it from appearing as done with any design of 
corrupting the text, that on the contrary, it appa- 
rently shows the sincerity of our Latin transla- 
tion ; for, as we keep our text, according as St. 
Hierom and the Church then delivered it ; so not- 
withstanding, because the said words are in the 
ancient Greek copies, we generally add them in 
the margin of every Latin Testament which the 
church uses, as may be seen in divers prints of 
Paris, Lovain, and other Universities : and if 
there be any fault in our English translation, it 
is only that this particle was not put down in the 
margin, as it was in the Latin which we followed. 
So that this, I say, proves no corruption, but 
rather great fidelity in our Latin Testament, that 
it agrees with St. Hierom, and consequently with 
the Greek copies, which he interpreted, as with 
St. Ambrose, St. Bede, Haymo, and St. Anselm. 

Whether these vain and frivolous objections 
are sufficient grounds for their rejecting our 
Vulgate Latin, and flying to the original (but 
now impure) fountains, I refer to the judicious 
reader. 

But now, how clear, limpid, and pure the 
streams are, that flow from the Greek and He- 
brew fountains, through the channel of Pro- 
testant pens, the reader may easily guess with- 
out taking the pains of comparing them, from 
the testimonies they themselves bear of one an- 
other's translations. 

Zuinglius writes thus to Luther, concerning 
his corrupt translation : (b) " Thou corruptest 
the word of God, O Luther : thou art seen to 
be a manifest and common corrupter and per- 
verter of the holy scripture ; how much are we 
ashamed of thee, who have hitherto esteemed 
thee beyond all measure, and prove thee to be 
such a man !" 

Luther's Dutch translation of the old Testa- 
ment, especially of Job and the Prophets, had 
its blemishes, says Keckerman, and those no 
small ones, (c) neither are the blemishes in his 
New Testament to be accounted small ones ; 

(a) St. Beda in 1 Cor. c. xv. 
(*) Zuing. t. 2, ad Luth., lib. de S. 
(e) Keckerman, Syst. 8; Theol., lib. 2, p. 188; IS. 
Joh. v. 7. 



3 PREFACE. 

one of which is, his omitting and wholly leaving 
out this text in St. John's Epistle : " There be 
three who give testimony in heaven ; the Father, 
the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three 
are one." Again, in Rom. iii. 28, he adds the 
word " alone" to the text, saying, " We account 
a man to be justified by faith alone, without the 
works of the law." Of which intolerable cor- 
ruption being admonished, he persisted obstinate 
and wilful, saying, " So I will, so I command ; 
let my will be instead of reason," &c. (d) Lu- 
ther will have it so ; and at last thus concludes, 
" The word alone must remain in my New Tes- 
tament ; although all the Papists run mad, they 
shall not take it from thence : it grieves me, 
that I did not add also those two other words, 
Omnibus et omnium, sine omnibus operibxts, om- 
nium legum ; without all works of all laws." 

Again, in requital to Zuinglius, Luther rejects 
the Zuinglian translation, terming them in 
matter of divinity, " fools, asses, antichrists, de- 
ceivers," &c. (e) and indeed, not without cause ; 
for what could be more deceitful and anti- 
christian, than instead of our Saviour's words, 
" this is my body," to translate, " this signifies 
my body," as Zuinglius did, to maintain his 
figurative signification of the words, and cry 
down Christ's real presence of the blessed 
sacrament ? 

When Froscheverus, the Zuinglian printer 
of Zurick, sent Luther a Bible translated by the 
divines there, he would not receive it ; but as 
Hospinian and Lavatherus witness, sent it back 
and rejected it. (f) 

The Tigurine translation was, in like manner, 
so distasteful to other Protestants, " that the 
Elector of Saxony in great anger rejected it and 
placed Luther's translation in room there- 
°f-" (g) 

Beza reproves the translation set forth by 
Oecolampadius, and the divines of Basil ; 
affirming, " that the Basil translation is in many 
places wicked, and altogether differing from the 
mind of the Holy Ghost." 

Castalio's translation is also condemned by 
(/() Beza, as being sacrilegious, wicked, and 
ethnical ; insomuch, that Castalio wrote a special 
treatise in defence of it ; in the preface of which 
he thus complains : " Some reject our Latin 
and French translations of the Bible, not only 
as unlearned, but also as wicked, and differing 
in many places from the mind of the Holy 
Ghost." 

The learned Protestant, Molinceus, affirms 
of Calvin's translation, " that Calvin in his har- 
mony, makes the text of the Gospel to leap up 
and down ; he uses violence to the letter of the 
Gospel ; and besides this, adds to the text." (i) 

(d) To. v. Germ. fol. 141, 144. 

(e) See Zuing. Tom. 2, ad Luth. lib.de Sacr.,fol. 388, 
389. 

(/) Hosp. Hist. Sacram. part. ult. fol. 183; Lavath. 
Hist. Sacram. 1. 32. 

(g) Hospin. in Concord. Discord, fol. 138. 

(h) In Respons. ad Defens. et Respons. Castal in 
Test. 1556, in Praefat. et in Annot. in Mat. iii. et iv., Luc. 
ii.; Act. viii. et x. 1 Cor. L 

(£) In suaTranslat. Nov. Test. Part. 12, fol. 110. 



THE AUTHORS PREFACE. 



21 



And touching Beza's translation, which our 
English especially follow, the same Molinceus 
charges him, that " he actually changes the 
text ;" giving likewise several instances of his 
corruptions. Castalio also, " a learned Cal- 
vinist, as Osiander says, " and skilful in the 
tongues," reprehends Beza in a book wholly 
written against his corruptions ; and says further, 
" I will not note all his errors, for that would 
require too large a volume. "(a) 

In short, Bucer and the Osianderians rise up 
against Luther for false translations ; Luther 
against Munster ; Beza against Castalio, and 
Castalio against Beza ; Calvin against Servetus ; 
Illyricus against both Calvin and Beza. (b) 
Staphylus and Emserus noted in Luther's Dutch 
translations of the New Testament only, about 
one thousand four hundred heretical corrup- 
tions, (c) And thus far of the confessed cor- 
ruptions in foreign Protestant translators. 

If you desire a character of our English Pro- 
testant versions, pray be pleased to take it from 
the words, of these following Protestants ; 
some of the most zealous and precise of whom, 
in a certain treatise, entitled, " A petition di- 
rected to his most excellent majesty King 
James the First," complain, " that our transla- 
tion of the Psalms, comprised in our Book of Com- 
mon Prayer, doth, in addition, subtraction, and 
alteration, differ from the truth of the Hebrew 
in, at least, two hundred places." If two hun- 
dred corruptions were found in the Psalms only, 
and that by Protestants themselves, how many, 
think yon, might be found from the beginning 
of Genesis, to the end of the Apocalypse, if ex- 
amined by an impartial and strict examination ? 
And this they made the ground of their scruple, 
to make use of the Common Prayer ; remain- 
ing ^doubtful, " whether a man may, with a 
safe conscience, subscribe thereto :" yea, they 
wrote and published a particular treatise, en- 
titled, " A Defence of the Ministers' Reasons 
for refusal of Subscribing ;" the whole argument 
and scope whereof, is only concerning mis- 
translating ; yea, the reader may see, in the 
beginning of the said book, the title of every 
chapter, twenty-six in all, pointing to the 
mistranslations there handled in particular. 
(d) (e) 

Mr. Carlisle avouches, " that the English 
translators have depraved the sense, obscured 
the truth, and deceived the ignorant : that in 
many places they detort the scriptures from the 
right sense, and that they show themselves to love 
darkness more than light : falsehood more than 
truth." Which Doctor Reynold's objecting 
against the Church of England, Mr. Whitaker 
had no better answer than to say, " What 
Mr. Carlisle, with some others, has written 
against some places translated in our Bibles, 
makes nothing to the purpose ; I have not 

O) In Test. Part. 20, 30, 40, 64, 65, 66, 74,99, et Part. 8, 
13, 14, 2], 23. 

(b) In Defens. trans., p. 170. 

(c) See Lind Dub. p. 84, 85, 96, 98. 

(d) Petition directed to his Majesty, p. 75, 76. 

(e) That Christ descended into hell, p. 116,117,118, 
121, 154. 

4 



said otherwise, but that some things may be 
amended." (/) 

The Ministers of Lincoln diocess could not 
forbear, in their great zeal, to signify to the 
king, that the English translation of the Bible, 
" is a translation that takes away from the text, 
that adds to the text, and that sometimes, to the 
changing or obscuring of the meaning of the 
Holy Ghost ;" calling it yet further, " a trans- 
lation which is absurd and senseless, pervert- 
ing, in many places, the meaning of the Holy 
Ghost." (g) 

For which cause, Protestants of tender con- 
sciences made great scruple of subscribing 
thereto : " How shall I," says Mr. Burges, 
" approve under my hand, a translation which 
hath so many omissions, many additions, which 
sometimes obscures, sometimes perverts the 
sense ; being sometimes senseless, sometimes 
contrary ?" (k) 

This great evil of corrupting the scripture 
being well considered by Mr. Broughton, one 
of the most zealous sort of Protestants, obliged 
him to write an epistle to the Lords of the 
Council, desiring them with all speed to procure 
a new translation : " because," says he, " that 
which is now in England is full of errors." (i) 
And in his advertisements of corruptions, he 
tells the Bishops, " that their public translations 
of scriptures into English is such, that it per- 
verts the text of the old Testament in eight 
hundred and forty-eight places, and that it causes 
millions of millions to reject the New Testament, 
and to run to eternal flames." A most dreadful 
saying, certainly, for all those who are forced to re- 
ceive such a translation for their only rule of faith. 

King James the First thought the Geneva 
translation to be the worst of all ; and further 
affirmed, " that in the marginal notes annexed 
to the Geneva translation, some are very partial, 
untrue, seditious," &c. (k) Agreeable to this are 
also these words of Mr. Parkes to Doctor 
Willet : " As for the Geneva Bibles, it is to 
be wished, that either they were purged from 
those manifold errors which are both in the text 
and in the margin, or else utterly prohibited." 

Now these our Protestant English transla- 
tions being thus confessedly " corrupt, absurd, 
senseless, contrary, and preverting the meaning 
of the Holy Ghost ;" had not King James the 
First just cause to affirm, " that he could never 
see a Bible well translated into English V- (I) 
And whether such falsely translated Bibles 
ought to be imposed upon the ignorant people, 
and by them received for the very Word of 
God, and for their only rule of faith, I refer to 
the judgment of the world ; and do freely assert 
with Doctor Whitaker, a learned Protestant, 

(/) Whitaker's Answer to Dr. Reynolds, p. 255. 

(g) Seethe Abridgment, which the Ministers of LincolR 
Diocess delivered to his Majesty, p. 11, 12, 13. 

(h) Burges Apol. Sect. 6, aud in Covel's Answer to 
Burges, p. 93- 

(t) See the Triple Cord, p. 147. 

(k) Seethe Conference before the King's Majesty, p. 46, 
47. Apologies concerning Christ's descent into hell at 
Ddd. 

(I) Conference before his Majesty, p. 46. 



22 THE AUTHOR 

" that translations are so far only the Word of 
God, as they faithfully express the meaning of 
the authentical text." (a) 

The English Protestant translations having 
been thus exclaimed against, and cried down not 
only by Catholics, but even by the most learned 
Protestants, (b) as you have seen ; it pleased his 
majesty, King James the First, to command a 
review and reformation of those translations 
which had passed for God's Word in King 
Edward the Sixth, and Queen Elizabeth's days, 
(c) Which work was undertaken by the prelatic 
clergy, not so much, it is to be feared, for the 
zeal of truth, as appears by their having cor- 
rected so very few places, as out of a design of 
correcting such faults as favoured the more 
puritanical part of Protestants (Presbyterians) 
against the usurped authority, pretended episco- 
pacy, ceremonies, and traditions of the prelatic 
party. For example : the word " congregation" 
in their first Bibles, was the usual and only 
English word they made use of for the Greek 
and Latin word kxxXijala ecclesia, because then 
the name of church was most odious to them ; 
yea, they could not endure to hear any mention 
of a church, because of the Catholic Church, 
which they had fosaken, and which withstood 
and condemned them. But now, being grown 
up to something (as themselves fancy) like a 
church, they resolve in good earnest to take upon 
them the face, figure, and grandeur of a church ; 
to censure and excommunicate, yea, and perse- 
cute their disssenting brethern ; rejecting there- 
fore that humble appellation which their primi- 
tive ancestors were content with, viz. congrega- 
tion, they assume the title of church, the Church 
of England, to countenance which r they bring 
the word church again into their translations, 
and banish that their once darling congregation. 

They have also, instead of ordinances, institu- 
tions, &c. been pleased in some places to trans- 
late traditions ; thereby to vindicate several 
ceremonies of theirs against their Puritanical 
brethren ; as in behalf of their character, they 
rectified, " ordaining elders, by election." 

The word Image being so shameful a cor- 
ruption, they were pleased likewise to correct, 
and instead thereof to translate Idol according 
to the true Greek and Latin. Yet it appears 
that this was not amended out of any good de- 
sign, or love of truth ; but either merely out of 
shame, or however to have it said that they had 
done something. Seeing they have not cor- 
rected it in all places, especially in the Old 
Testament, Exod. xx., where they yet read 
Image, " Thou shalt not make to thyself any 
graven image," the word in Hebrew being Pesel, 
the very same that Sculptile is in Latin, and 
signifies in English a graven or carved thing ; 
and in the Greek it is Eidolon (an Idol) : so 
that by this false and wicked practice, they en- 
deavour to discredit the Catholic religion ; and, 
contrary to their own consciences, and correc- 

(ffl) Whitaker's Answer to Dr. Reynolds, p. 235. 

(6) Dr. Gregory Martin wrote a whole Treatise against 
them 

(c) Bishop Tunstal discovered in Tyndal's New Testa- 
ment only, no less than 2000 corruptions. 1 



,'s PREFACE. 

tions in the New Testament, endeavour to make 
the people believe that Image and Idol are the 
same, and equally forbidden by scripture, and 
God's commandments ; and consequently, that 
Popery is idolatry, for admitting the due use of 
images. 

They have also corrected that most absurd 
and shameful corruption, grave ; and, as they 
ought to do, have instead of it translated hell, 
so that now they read, " Thou wilt not leave my 
soul in hell ;" whereas Beza has it, " Thou wilt 
not leave my carcase in the grave." Yet we 
see, that this is not out of any sincere intention, 
or respect to truth neither, because they have 
but corrected it in some few places, not in all, 
as you will see hereafter ; which they would not 
do, especially in Genesis, lest they should there- 
by be forced to admit of Limbus Patrum, where 
Jacob's soul was to descend, when he said, " I 
will go down to my son into hell, mourning," 
&c. And to balance the advantage they think 
they may have given Catholics where they have 
corrected it, they have (against purgatory and 
Limbus Patrum) in other places most grossly 
corrupted the text : for whereas the words of 
our Saviour are, " Quickened in spirit or soul. 
In the which spirit coming, he preached to them 
also that were in prison," (d) they translate, 
" Quickened by the spirit, by which also he went 
and preached unto the spirits in prison." This 
was so notorious a corruption, that Dr. Mon- 
tague, afterwards Bishop of Chichester and 
Norwich, reprehended Sir Henry Saville for it, 
to whose care the translating of St. Peter's 
epistle was committed ; Sir Henry Saville told 
him plainly, that Dr. Abbot, archbishop of 
Canterbury, and Dr. Smith, bishop of Glou- 
cester, corrupted and altered this translation of 
this place, which himself had sincerely performed. 
Note here, by the bye, that if Dr. Abbot's con- 
science could so lightly suffer him to corrupt the 
scripture, his, or his servant Mason's forging 
the Lambeth Records, could not possibly cause 
the least scruple, especially being a thing so 
highly for their interest and honour. 

These are the chiefest faults they have cor- 
rected in this their new translation ; and with 
what sinister designs they have amended them, 
appears visible enough ; to wit, either to keep 
their authority, and gain credit for their new- 
thought-on episcopal and priestly character and 
ceremonies against Puritans or Presbyterians ; 
or else, for very shame, urged thereto by the 
exclamations of Catholics, daily inveighing 
against such intolerable falsifications. But 
because they resolved not to correct either all, 
or the tenth part of the corruptions of the for- 
mer translation : therefore, fearing their over- 
seen falsifications would be observed, both by 
Puritans and Catholics, in their Epistle Dedi- 
catory to the king, they desire his majesty's pro- 
tection, for that " on the one side, we shall be 
traduced," say they, " by Popish persons at home 
or abroad, who therefore will malign us, because 
we are poor instruments to make God's holy 

(d) 1 Peter iii. 18, 19. 



THE AUTHOR'S PREFACE. 



23 



truth to be yet more known unto the people 
whom they desire still to keep in ignorance and 
darkness : on the other side, we shall be ma- 
ligned by self-conceited brethern, who run their 
own ways," &c. 

We see how they endeavour here to persuade 
the king and the world, that Catholics are desi- 
rous to conceal the light of the Gospel : whereas 
on the contrary, nothing is more obvious, than 
the daily and indefatigable endeavours of Ca- 
tholic missioners and priests, not only in preach- 
ing and explaining God's holy word in Europe ; 
but also in forsaking their own countries and 
inconveniences, and travelling with great diffi- 
culties and dangers by sea and land, into Asia, 
Africa, America, and the Antipodes, with no 
other design than to publish the doctrine of 
Christ, and to discover and manifest the light of 
the Gospel to infidels, who are in darkness and 
ignorance. Nor do any but Catholics stick to 
the old letter and sense of scripture, without 
altering the text or rejecting any part thereof, 
or devising new interpretations ; which certainly 
cannot demonstrate a desire in them to keep 
people in ignorance and darkness. Indeed, as 
for their self conceited Presbyterian and fanatic 
brethern, who run their own ways in translating 
and interpreting scripture, we do not excuse 
them, but only say, that we see no reason why 
prelatics should reprehend them for a fault, 
whereof themselves are no less guilty. Do not 
themselves of the Church of England run their 
own ways also ; as well as those other sectaries 
in translating the Bible 1 Do they stick to 
either the Greek, Latin, or Hebrew text ? Do 
they not leap from one language and copy to 
another ? accept and reject what they please ? 
Do they not fancy a sense of their own, every 
whit as contrary to that of the Catholic and an- 
cient church, as that of their self-conceited bre- 
thren the Presbyterians, and others, is acknow- 
ledged to be ? And yet they are neither more 
learned nor more skilful in the tongues, nor 
more godly than those they so much contemn 
and blame. 

All heretics who have ever waged war against 
God's holy church, whatever particular wea- 
pons they had, have generally made use of these 
two, viz., " Misrepresenting and ridiculing the 
doctrine of God's church ;" and, " corrupting 
and misinterpreting his sacred word, the holy 
scripture ;" we find not any since Simon Magus's 
days, that have ever been more dexterous and 
skilful in handling these direful arms, than the 
heretics of our times. 

In the first place, they are so great masters 
and doctors in misrepresenting, mocking, and 
deriding religion, that they seem even to have 
solely devoted themselves to no other profession 
or place, but " Cathedra irrisorum" the school 
or " chair of the scorner," as David terms their 
seat : which the holy apostle St. Peter foresaw, 
when he foretold, that " there should come in 
the latter days, illusores, scoffers, walking 
after their own lusts." To whom did this pro- 
phecy ever better agree, than to the heretics of 
our days, who deride the sacred scriptures ? 



" The author of the book of Ecclesiastes," says 
one of them, " had neither boots nor spurs, but 
rid on a long stick, in begging shoes." Who 
scoff at the book of Judith : compare the Ma- 
cabees to Robin Hood, and Bevis of Southamp- 
ton : call Baruch, a peevish ape of Jeremy : 
count the Epistle to the Hebrews as stubble : 
and deride St. James's, as an epistle made of 
straw : contemn three of the four Gospels. 
What, ridiculing is this of the word of God ! 
Nor were the first pretended reformers only 
guilty of this, but the same vein has still con- 
tinued in the writings, preachings, and teachings 
of their successors ; a great part of which are 
nothing but a mere mockery, ridiculing, and 
misrepresenting of the doctrine of Christ, as is 
too notorious and visible in many scurrilous and 
scornful writings and sermons lately published 
by several men of no small figure in our English 
Protestant Church. By which scoffing strata- 
gem, when they cannot laugh the vulgar into a 
contempt and abhorrence of the Christian reli- 
gion, they fly to their other weapons, to wit, 
" imposing upon the people's weak understand- 
ing, by a corrupt, imperfect, and falsely trans- 
lated Bible." (a) 

Tertullian complained thus of the heretics of 
his time, Ista hwresis non recipit quasdum scrip- 
turas, &c. " These heretics admit not some 
books of scriptures ; and those which they do 
admit, by adding to, and taking from, they per- 
vert to serve their purpose ; and if they receive 
some books, yet they receive them not entirely ; 
or if they receive them entirely, after some sort 
nevertheless they spoil them by devising divers 
interpretations. In this case, what will you do, 
who think yourselves skilful in scriptures, when 
that which you defend, the adversary denies ; and 
that which you deny, he defends ?" Et tu 
quidem nihil perdes nisi vocem de contentione, 
nihil consequeris nisi bilem de blasphematione : 
" And you indeed shall lose nothing but words 
in this contention ; nor shall you gain any thing 
but anger from his blasphemy." How fitly may 
these words be applied to the pretended refor- 
mers of our days ! who, when told of their abu- 
sing, corrupting, and misinterpreting the holy 
scriptures, are so far from acknowledging their 
faults, that on the contrary they blush not to 
defend them. When Dr. Martin in his disco- 
very, told them of their falsifications in the 
Bible, did they thank him for letting them see 
their mistakes, as indeed men endued with the 
spirit of sincerity and honesty would have done ? 
No, they were so far from that, that Fulk, as 
much as in him lies, endeavours very obstinately 
to defend them : and Whitaker affirms, that 
" their translations are well done." Why then 
were they afterwards corrected 1 and that all the 
faults Dr. Martin finds in them are but trifles ; 
demanding what is there in their Bibles that can 
be found fault with, as not translated well and 
truly ? (b) Such a pernicious, obstinate, and 
contentious spirit, are heretics possessed with, 

(a) Dr. St , Dr. S., Dr. T., Mr. W., &c. 

(b) Whitaker, p. 14. 



34 



THE AUTHOR'S PREFACE. 



which indeed is the very thing that renders them 
heretics ; for with such I do not rank those in 
the list, who, though they have even with their 
first milk, as I may say, imbibed their errors, 
and have been educated from their childhood in 
erroneous opinions, yet do neither pertinaciously 
adhere to the same, nor obstinately resist the 
truth, when proposed to them ; but on the con- 
trary, are willing to embrace it. 

How many innocent, and well-meaning people, 
are there in England, who have scarcely in all 
their life-time, ever heard any mention of a 
Catholic, or Catholic religion, unless under 
these monstrous and frightful terms of idolatry, 
superstition, antichristianism, &c. ? How many 
have ever heard a better character of Catholics, 
than bloody-minded people, thirsters after blood, 
worshippers of wooden gods, prayers to stocks 
and stones, idolators, antichrists, the beast in 
the Revelations, and what not, that may render 
them more odious than hell, and more frightful 
than the devil himself, and that from the mouths 
and pens of their teachers, and ministerial 
guides ? Is it then to be wondered at, that 
these so grossly deceived people should enter- 
tain a strange prejudice against religion, and a 
♦ detestation of Catholics ? 

Whereas, if these blindfolded people were 
once undeceived, and brought to understand, 
that all these monstrous scandals are falsely 
charged upon Catholics ; that the Catholic 
doctrine is so far from idolatry, that it teaches 
quite the contrary, viz., That whosoever gives 
God's honour to stocks and stones, as Protes- 
tants phrase it, to images, to saints, to angels, 
or to any creature ; yea, to any thing but to 
God himself, is an idolater, and will be damned 
for the same ; that Catholics are so far from 
thirsting after the blood of others, that on the 
contrary, their doctrine teaches them, not only 
to love God above all, and their neighbour as 
themselves, but even to love their enemies. In 
short, so far different is the Roman Catholic 
religion from what it is by Protestants repre- 
sented, that on the contrary, Faith, Hope, and 
Charity, are the three divine virtues it teaches 
us ; Prudence, Justice, Fortitude, and Tem- 
perance, are the four moral virtues it exhorts 
us to : which christian virtues, when it happens 
that they are, through human fraility, and the 
temptations of our three enemies, the world, the 
flesh, and the devil, either wounded or lost ; 
then are we taught to apply ourselves to such 
divine remedies, as our blessed Saviour Christ 
has left us in his church, viz., his holy sacra- 
ments, by which our spiritual infirmities are 
cured and repaired. By the sacrament of bap- 



tism we are taught, that original sin is forgiven, 
and that the party baptized is regenerated, 
and born anew unto the mystical body of Christ, 
of which by baptism he is made a lively mem- 
ber : so likewise by the sacrament of penance 
all our actural sins are forgiven ; the same holy 
Spirit of God working in this to the forgiveness 
of actual sin, that wrought before in the sacra- 
ment of baptism to the forgiveness of original 
sin. We are taught likewise, that by partaking 
of Christ's very body, and his very blood, in the 
blessed sacrament of the Eucharist, we by a 
perfect union dwell in him, and he in us, and 
that as himself rose again for our justification, 
so we, at the day of judgement, shall in him 
receive a glorious resurrection, and reign with 
him for all eternity, as glorious members of the 
same body, whereof himself is the head. It 
further teaches us, that none but a priest, truly 
consecrated by the holy sacrament of order, can 
consecrate and administer the holy sacraments. 
This is our religion, this is the centre it tends 
to, and the sole end it aims at ; which point, 
we are further taught, can never be gained but 
by a true faith, a firm hope, and a perfect 
charity. 

To conclude : if, I say, thousands of well- 
meaning Protestants understood this, as also that 
Protestancy itself is nothing else but a mere im- 
posture begun in Germany and England, main- 
tained and upheld by the wicked policy of self- 
interested statesmen ; and still continued by mis- 
representing and ridiculing the Catholic religion, 
by misinterpreting the holy scriptures ; yea, by 
falsifying, abusing, and, as will appear is this fol- 
lowing treatise, by most abominably corrupting 
the sacred word of God : how far would it be 
from them obstinately and pertinaciously to ad- 
here to the false and erroneous principles, in 
which they have hitherto been educated ? How 
willingly would they submit their understandings 
to the obedience of faith 1 How earnestly would 
they embrace that rule of faith, which our 
blessed Saviour and his Apostles left us for our 
guide to salvation ? With what diligence would 
they bend all their studies, to learn the most 
wholesome and saving doctrine of God's holy 
church ? In fine, if once enlightened with a true 
faith, and encouraged with a firm hope, what 
zealous endeavours would they not use to acquire 
-such virtues and christian perfections, as might 
inflame them with a perfect charity, which is the 
very ultimate and highest step to eternal felicity ? 
To which, may God of his infinite goodness 
and tender mercy, through the merits and bitter 
death and passion of our dear Saviour Jesus 
Christ, bring us all. Amen. 



THE TRUTH 

OF 

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE 

EXAMINED. 



Our pretended Reformers, having squared and 
modelled to themselves a faith contrary to the 
certain and direct rule of apostolical tradition, 
delivered in God's holy church, were forced to 
have recourse to the scripture, as their only rule 
of faith ; according to which, the Church of 
England has, in the sixth of her Thirty-nine 
Articles, declared, " that the scripture compre- 
hended in the canonical books (i. e., so many of 
them as she thinks fit to call so) of the Old and 
New Testament, is the rule of faith so far, that, 
whatsoever is not read therein, or cannot be 
proved thereby, is not to be accepted as any 
point of faith, or needful to be followed." But 
finding themselves still at a loss, their new doc- 
trines being so far from being contained in the 
holy scripture, that they were directly opposite 
to it ; they were fain to seek out to themselves 
many other inventions ; amongst which, none 
was more generally practised than the corrupting 
of the holy scripture, by false and partial transla- 
tions ; by which they endeavoured, right or 
wrong, to make those sacred volumes speak in 
favour of their new-invented faith and doctrine. 

The corruptions of this nature in the first 
English Protestant translations, were so many, 
and so notorious, that Dr. Gregory Martin com- 
posed a whole book of them, in which he dis- 
covers the fraudulent shifts the translators were 
fain to make use of, in defence of them. Some- 
times they recurred to the Hebrew text ; and 
when that spoke against their new doctrine, 
then to the Greek ; when that favoured them 
not, to some copy acknowledged by themselves 
to be corrupted, and of no credit ; and when no 
copy at all could be found out to cloak their 
corruptions, then must the book or chapter of 
scripture contradicting them be declared apoc- 
ryphal ; and when that cannot be made prob- 
able, they fall downright upon the prophets 
and apostles who wrote them, saying, " that 
they might and did err, even after the coming 
of the Holy Ghost." Thus Luther, accused by 
Zuinglius for corrupting the word of God, had 



no way left to defend his impiety, but by impu- 
dently preferring himself, and his own spirit, 
before that of those who wrote the holy scrip- 
tures, saying, " Be it, that the church, Augus- 
tine, and other doctors, also Peter and Paul, 
yea, an angel from heaven, teach otherwise, yet 
is my doctrine such as sets forth God's glory, &c. 
Peter, the chief of the apostles, lived and taught 
(extra verbum Dei) besides the word of God. "(c) 

And against St. James's mentioning the sa- 
crament of extreme unction : " But though," 
says he, " this were the epistle of St. James, I 
would answer, that it is not lawful for an apostle, 
by his authority, to institute a sacrament ; this 
appertains to Christ alone. "(b) As though that 
blessed apostle would publish a sacrament with- 
out warrant from Christ ! Our Church of 
England divines, having unadvisedly put St. 
James's epistle into the canon, are forced, instead 
of such an answer, to say, " That the sacrament 
of extreme unction was yet in the days of Gre- 
gory the Great, unformed." As though the 
apostle St. James had spoken he knew not 
what, when he advised, that the sick should be, 
by the priests of the church, " anointed with oil 
in the name of our Lord."(c) 

Nor was this Luther's shift alone ; for all 
Protestants follow their first pretended reform- 
er in this point, being necessitated so to do for 
the maintenance of their reformations, and trans- 
lations, so directly opposite to the known letter 
of the scripture. 

The Magdeburgians follow Luther, in accu- 
sing the apostles of error, particularly St. Paul, 
by the persuasion of James. (d) 

Brentius also, whom Jewel terms a grave and 
learned father, affirms, " that St. Peter, the 
chief of the apostles, and also Barnabas, after 

(a) Vid. Supr. torn. 5, Wittemb., fol. 290, and in Ep. 
ad Galat., cap. i. 

(b) De Capt. Babil., cap. de Extrem. Unct., torn. 2, 
"Wittemb. 

(c) See the Second Defence of the Exposition of the 
Doctrine of the Church of England, &c. 

(d) Cent. 1, 1. ii., c. 10, col. 580. 



26 PROTESTANT '. 

the Holy Ghost was received, together with the 
church of Jerusalem, erred." 

John Calvin affirms, that " Peter added to the 
schism of the church, to the endangering of 
Christian liberty, and the overthrow of the grace 
of Christ." And in page 150, he reprehends 
Peter and Barnabas, and others. (a) 

Zanchius mentions some Calvinists, in his 
Epist. ad Misc.,vf\io said, "If Paul should 
come to Geneva, and preach the same hour 
with Calvin, they would leave Paul, and hear 
Calvin." And Lavatherus affirms, that " some of 
Luther's followers, not the meanest among their 
doctors, said, they had rather doubt of St. Paul's 
doctrine than the doctrine of Luther, or of the 
Confession of Augsburgh."(6) 

These desperate shifts being so necessary for 
warranting their corruptions of scripture, and 
maintaining the fallibility of the church in suc- 
ceeding ages, for the same reasons which con- 
clude it infallible in the apostles' time, are ap- 
plicable to ours, and to every former century ; 
otherwise it must be said, that God's pnnidence 
and promises were limited to a few years, and 
Himself so partial, that he regards not the 
necessities of his church, nor the salvation of 
any person who lived after the time of his disci- 
ples ; the Church of England could not reject 
it without contradicting their brethren abroad, 
and their own principles at home. Therefore 
Mr. Jewel, in his defence of the apology for the 
Church of England, affirms, that St. Mark 
mistook Abiathar for Abimelech ; and St. 
Matthew, Hieremias for Zacharias.(c) And Mr. 
Fulk against the Rhemish Testament, in Galat. 
ii., fol. 322, charges Peter with error of igno- 
rance against the Gospel. 

Doctor Goad, in his four Disputations with 
Father Campion, affirms, that " St. Peter erred 
in faith, and that, after the sending down of the 
Holy Ghost upon them. "(J) And Whitaker 
says, " It is evident, that even after Christ's 
ascension, and the Holy Ghost's descending 
upon the apostles, the whole church, not only 
the common sort of Christians, but also even 
the apostles themselves, erred in the vocation 
of the Gentiles, &c. ; yea, Peter also erred. He 
furthermore erred in manners, &c. And these 
were great errors ; and yet we see these to have 
been in the apostles, even after the Holy Ghost 
descended upon them. "(e) 

Thus, these fallible reformers, who, to coun- 
tenance their corruptions of scripture, grace 
their own errors, and authorise their church's 
fallibility, would make the apostles themselves 
fallible ; but indeed, they need not have gone 
this bold way to work, for we are satisfied, and 
can very easily believe their church to be falli- 
ble, their doctrines erroneous, and themselves 
corrupters of the scriptures, without being forced 
to hold, that the apostles erred. (f) 

(a) Calvin in Galat., c. ii., v. 14, p. 511. 

(b) Lavater in Histor. Sacrament, p. 18. 

(c) Page 361. 

(rf)The second dav's conference. 
(e) Whitaker de Eccles. contr. Bellar. Controvers. 2 
q. 4, p: 223. 

(/) Protestants, to authorise their own errors and fal- 



TRANSL ATIONS 

And truly, if, as they say, the apostles were 
not only fallible, but taught errors in manners, 
and matters of faith, after the Holy Ghost's 
descending upon them, their writings can be no 
infallible rule, or, as themselves term it, perfect 
rule of faith, to direct men to salvation : which 
conclusion is so immediately and clearly deduced 
from this Protestant doctrine, that the supposal 
and premises once granted, there can be no 
certainty in the scripture itself. And indeed, 
this we see all the pretended reformers aimed 
at, though they durst not say so much ; and 
we shall in this little tract make it most evi- 
dently appear, from their intolerable abusing 
it, how little esteem and what slight regard they 
have for the sacred scripture ; though they make 
their ignorant flocks believe, that, as they have 
translated it, and delivered it to them, it is 
the pure and infallible word of God. 

Before I come to particular examples of their 
falsifications and corruptions, let me advertise 
the reader, that my intention is to make use 
only of such English translations as are common, 
and well known in England even to this day, 
as being yet in many men's hands : to wit, 
those Bibles printed in the years 1562, 1577, 
and 1579, in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's 
reign ; which I will confront with their last 
translation made in King James the First's 
reign, from the impression printed in London, 
in the year 1 683. 

In all which said Bibles, (g) I shall take 
notice sometimes of one translation, sometimes 
of another, as every one's falsehood shall give 
occasion : neither is it a good defence for the 
falsehood of one, that it is truly translated in 
another, the reader being deceived by any one, 
because commonly he reads but one ; yea, one 
of them is a condemnation of the other. And 
where the English corruptions, here noted, are 
not to be found in one of the first three Bibles, 
let the reader look in another of them ; for if 
he find not the falsification in all, he will cer- 
tainly find it in two, or at least in one of them ; 
and in this case, I advertise the reader to be 
very circumspect, that he think not, by and by, 
these are falsely charged, because there may be 
found, perhaps, some later edition, wherein the 
same error we noted, may be corrected ; for it 
is their common and known fashion, not only in 
their translations of the Bible, but in their other 
books and writings, to alter and change, add and 
put out, in their later editions, according as either 
themselves are ashamed of the former, or their 
scholars who print them again, dissent or disa- 
gree from their masters. 

Note also, that though I do not so much 
charge them with falsifying the Vulgate Latin 
Bible, which has always been of so great autho- 
rity in the church of God, and with all the (h) 
ancient Fathers, as I do the Greek, which they 
pretend to translate : I cannot, however, but 

libility, would make the apostles themselves erroneous 
and fallible. 

(g) Bib. J 562, 77, or 79. 

(/t) See the Preface to the Rheims New Testament 



OF THE SCRIPTURE. 



27 



observe, that as Luther wilfully forsook the 
Latin text in favour of his heresies and erro- 
neous doctrines ; so the rest follow his example 
even to this day, for no other cause in the world 
but that it makes against their errors. 

For testimony of which, what greater argu- 
ment can there be than this, that Luther, who 
before had always read with the Catholic 
Church, and with all antiquity, these words of 
St. Paul, " Have not we power to lead about a 
woman, a sister, as also the rest of the apos- 
tles 1" (a) And in St. Peter, these words, 
" Labour, that by good works you may make 
sure your vocation and election." Suddenly 
after he had, contrary to his profession, taken 
a wife, as he called her, and preached, that, all 
votaries might do the same : that " faith alone 
justified, and that good works were not neces- 
sary to salvation." Immediately, I say, after 
he fell into these heresies, he began to read and 
translate the former texts of scripture accord- 
ingly, in this manner : " Have not we power to 
lead about a sister, a wife, as the rest of the 
apostles ?" and, " Labour that you may make 
sure your vocation and election," leaving out 
the other words " by good works." And so do 
both the Calvinists abroad, and our English 
Protestants at home, read and translate even 
to this day, because they hold the self-same er- 
rors. 

I would gladly know of our English Protes- 
tant translators, whether they reject the Vulgate 
Latin text, so generally liked and approved 
by all the primitive Fathers, purely out of de- 
sign to furnish us with a more sincere and 
simple version into English from the Greek, 
than they thought they could do from the Vul- 
gate Latin 1 If so, why not stick close to the 
Greek copy, which they pretend to translate 1 
but, besides their corrupting of it, fly from it, 
and have recourse again to the Vulgate Latin, 
whenever it may seem to make more for their 
purpose. Whence maybe easily gathered, that 
their pretending to translate the Greek copy 
was not. with any good and candid design, but 
rather, because they knew it was not so easy a 
matter for the ignorant to discover their false 
dealings from it as from the Latin ; and also, 
because they might have the fairer pretence for 
their turning and winding to and fro from the 
Greek to the Latin, and then again to the Greek, 
according as they should judge most advan- 
tageous to themselves. It was also no little 
part of their design, " to lessen the credit and 
authority of the Vulgate Latin translation," 
which had so long, and with so general a 
consent, been received and approved in the 
church of God, and authorized by the general 
Council of Trent, for the only, best, and most 
authentic text. 

Because, therefore, I find they will scarcely 
be able to justify their rejecting the Latin 
translation, unless they had dealt more sin- 
cerely with the Greek ; I have, in this following 

(a) 1 Cor. ix. 5, Mulierem sororem. 2 Pet. i. 10, Ut 
per bona opera certam vestram vocalionem et electio- 
nem faciatis. 



work, set down the Latin text, as well as the 
Greek word whereon their corruption depends ; 
yet, where they truly keep to the Greek and He- 
brew, which they profess to follow, and which 
they will have to be the most authentic text, I 
do not charge them with heretical corruptions. 

The left-hand page I have divided into four 
columns, besides the margin, in which I have 
noted the book, chapter, and verse. In the 
first I have set down the text of scripture from 
the Vulgate Latin edition, putting the word that 
their English Bibles have corrupted in a dif- 
ferent character ; to which I have also added 
the Greek and Hebrew words, so often as they 
are, or may be necessary, for the better under- 
standing of the word on which the stress lies in 
the corrupt translation. 

In the second column, I have given you the 
true English text from the Roman Catholic 
translation, made by the divines of Rheims 
and Doway ; which is done so faithfully and 
candidly from the authentic Vulgate Latin copy, 
that the most carping and critical adversary in 
the world cannot accuse it of partiality or 
design, contrary to the true meaning and in- 
terpretation thereof. As for the English of 
the said Rhemish translation, which is old, and 
therefore must needs differ much from the more 
refined English spoken at this day, the reader 
ought to consider, not only the place where it 
was written, but also the time since which the 
translation was made, and then he will find the 
less fault with it. For my part, because I have 
referred my reader to the said translation made 
at Rheims, I have not altered one syllable of the 
English, though indeed I might in some places 
have made the word more agreeable to the lan- 
guage of our times. 

In the third column you have the corruption, 
and false translation, from those Bibles that 
were set forth in English at the beginning of 
that most miserable revolt and apostacy from 
the Catholic church, viz., from that Bible which 
was translated in King Edward the Sixth's time, 
and reprinted in the year 1562, and from the two 
next impressions, made Anno 1577, and 1579. 
All which were authorised in the beginning of 
Queen Elizabeth's reign, when the Church of 
England began to get footing, and to exercise 
dominion over her fellow sectaries, as well as 
to tyrannize over Catholics ; whence it cannot 
be denied, but those Bibles were wholly agree- 
able to the principles and doctrines of the said 
Church of England in those days, however they 
pretend at this day to correct or alter them. 

In the fourth column, you find one of the last 
impressions of their Protestant Bible, viz., 
that printed in London by the assigns of John 
Bill, deceased, and by Henry Hills and Thomas 
Newcomb, printers to the King's most excel- 
lent Majesty, Anno Dom. 1683. In which 
Bible, wherever I find them to have corrected 
and amended the place corrupted in their former 
translations, I have put down the word " cor- 
rected ;" but where the falsification is not yet 
rectified, I have set down likewise the corrup- 
tion : and that indeed is in most places, yea, and 



28 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 



in some two or three places, they have made it 
rather worse than better : and this indeed gives 
me great reason to suspect, that in those few 
places, where the errors of the former false 
translations have been corrected in the latter, 
it has not always been the effect of plain dealing 
and sincerity ; for if such candid intention of 
amending former faults had every where pre- 
vailed with them, they would not in any place 
have made it worse, but would also have cor- 
rected all the rest, as well as one or two, that are 
not now so much to their purpose, as they were 
at their first rising. 

In the right-hand page of this treatise, I have 
set down the motives and inducements, that, as 
we may reasonably presume, prompted them to 
corrupt and falsify the sacred text, with some 
short arguments here and there against their un- 
warrantable proceedings. 

All which I have contrived, in as short and 
compendious a method as I possibly could, 
knowing that there are many, who are either 
not able, or at least not willing to go to the 
price of a great volume. And because my de- 
sire is to be beneficial to all, I have accommo- 
dated it not only to the purse of the poorest, 
but also, as near as possible, to the capacity of 
the most ignorant ; for which reasons also, I have 
passed by a great many learned arguments 
brought by my author, Dr. Martin, from the 
significations, etymologies, derivations, uses, 
&c. of the Greek and Hebrew words, as also 
from the comparing of places corrupted, with 
other places rightly translated from the same 
word, in the same translation ; with several 
other things, whereby he largely confutes their 
insincere and disingenuous proceedings : these 
I say, I have omitted, not only for brevity sake, 
but also as things that could not be of any great 
benefit to the simple and unlearned reader. 

As for others more learned, I will refer them 
to the work itself, that I have made use of 
through this whole treatise, viz., to that most 
elaborate and learned work of Dr. Gregory 
Martin, entitled, a " Discovery of the manifold 
Corruptions of the Holy Scriptures," &c, 
printed atRheims, Anno 1582, which is not hard 
to be found. 

Have we not great cause to believe, that our 
Protestant divines do obstinately teach contrary 
to their own consciences ? For, besides their 
having been reproved, without amendment, for 
their impious handling the holy scriptures, if 
their learning be so profound and bottomless, as 
themselves proudly boast in all their works, we 
cannot but conclude, that they must needs both 
see their errors, and know the truth. And 
therefore, though we cannot always cry out to 
them, and their followers, " the blind lead the 
blind," yet, which is, alas ! a thousand times 
more miserable, we may justly exclaim, " those 
who see, lead the blind, till with themselves, they 
fall into the ditch." 

As nothing has ever been worse resented by 
such as forsake God's holy church, than to hear 
themselves branded with the general title of 
heretics ; so nothing has been ever more com- 



mon among Catholics, than justly to stigmatize 
such with the same infamous character. I am 
not ignorant how ill the Protestants of our days 
resent this term, and therefore do avoid, as much 
as the nature of this work will permit, giving 
them the least disgust by this horrid appellation : 
nevertheless, I must needs give them to under- 
stand, that the nature of the holy scripture is 
such, that whosoever do voluntarily corrupt and 
pervert it, to maintain their own erroneous doc- 
trines, cannot lightly be characterized by a less 
infamous title, than that of heretics ; and their 
false versions, by the title of heretical transla- 
tions, under which denomination I have placed 
these following corruptions. 

Notwithstanding, I would have the Protestant 
reader to take notice, that I neither name nor 
judge all to be heretics, as ishinted in my preface, 
who hold errors contradictory to God's church, 
but such as pertinaciously persist in their errors. 

So proper and essential is pertinacity to 
the nature of heresy, that if a man should hold 
or believe ever so many false opinions against 
the truth of Christian faith, but yet not with 
obstinacy and pertinacity, he should err, but 
not be an heretic. Saint Augustine asserting, 
that " if any do defend their opinions, though 
false and perverse, with no obstinate animosity, 
but rather with all solicitude seek the truth, 
and are ready to be corrected when they find 
the same, these men are not to be accounted 
heretics, because they have not any election of 
their own that contradicts the doctrine of the 
church." (a) And in another place, against the 
Donatists, " Let us," says he, " suppose some 
man to hold that of Christ at this day, which the 
heretic Photinus did, to wit, that Christ was 
only man, and not God, and that he should think 
this to be the Catholic faith ; I will not say that 
he is an heretic, unless when the doctrine of the 
church is made manifest unto him, he will rather 
choose to hold that which he held before, than 
yield thereunto. "(J) 

Again, " Those," says he, " who in the church 
of Christ hold infectious and perverse doctrine, 
if when they are corrected for it, they resist 
stubbornly, and will not amend their pestilent 
and deadly persuasions, but persist to defend 
the same, these men are made heretics :"(c) by 
all which places of St. Augustine, we see, that 
error without pertinacity, and obstinacy against 
God's church is no heresy. It would be well, 
therefore, if Protestants, in reading Catholic 
books, would endeavour rather to inform them- 
selves of the truth of Catholic doctrine, and 
humbly embrace the same, than to suffer that 
prejudice against religion, in which they have 
unhappily been educated, so strongly to bias 
them, as to turn them from men barely educated 
in error, to obstinate heretics ; such as the more 
to harden their own hearts, by how much the 
more clearly the doctrine of God's holy church 
is demonstrated to them. When the true faith 
is once made known to men, ignorance can no 

(a) S. Aug. Ep. 162. 

(b) Lib. 4, contr. Donat, c. vi. 

(c) De Civit. Dei, lib. xviii., c. 51. 



OF THE SCRIPTURE. 



29 



longer secure them from that eternal punishment 
to which heresy undoubtedly hurries them : St. 
Paul, in his Epistle to Titus, affirming, that '*' a 
man that is an heretic, after the first and second 
admonition, is subverted, and sinneth, being 
condemned by his own judgment." (a) 

Whatever may be said, therefore, to excuse 
the ignorant, and such as are not obstinate, from 
that ignominious character : yet, as for others, 
especially the leaders of these misguided people, 
they will scarcely be able to free themselves 
either from it, or escape the punishment due to 
such, so Song as they thus wilfully demonstrate 
their pertinacity, not only in their obstinately 
defending their erroneous doctrines in their 
disputes, sermons, and writings ; but even in 
corrupting the word of God, to force that sacred 
book to defend the same, and compel that divine 
volume to speak against such points of Catholic 
doctrine as themselves are pleased to deny. 

In what can an heretical intention more evi- 
dently appear, than in falsely translating and 
corrupting the holy Bible, against the Catholic 
church, and such doctrines as it has by an unin- 
terrupted tradition, brought down to us from the 
apostles ? As for example : 

1 . Against the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar. 

2. Against the Real Presence of Christ's 
Body and Blood in the Eucharist. 

3. Against Priests, and the Power of Priest- 
hood. 

4. Against the Authority of Bishops. 

5. Against the sacred Altar on which Christ's 
Body and Blood is offered. 

6. Against the Sacrament of Baptism. 

7. Against the Sacrament of Penance, and 
Confession of Sins. 

8. Against the Sacrament of Marriage. 

9. Against Intercession of Saints. 

10. Against sacred Images. 

11. Against Purgatory, Limbus Patrum, and 
Christ's Descent into Hell. 

12. Against Justification, and the possibility 
of keeping God's Commandments. 

13. Against meritorious Works, and the Re- 
ward due to the same. 

14. Against Free Will. 

15. Against true inherent Justice, and in de- 
fence of their own Doctrine, that Faith alone is 
sufficient for Salvation. 

] 6. Against Apostolical Traditions. 

Yea, against several other doctrines of God's 
holy Church, and in defence of divers strange 
opinions of their own, which the reader will find 
taken notice of in this treatise : all which, when 
the unprejudiced and well-meaning Protestant 
reader has considered, I am confident he will be 
struck with amazement, and even terrified to 
look upon such abominable corruptions ! 

Doubtless, the generality of Protestants have 
hitherto been ignorant, and more is the pity, of 
this illhandling of the Bible by their translators : 
nor have, I am confident, their ministerial guides 
ever yet dealt so ingenuously by them, as to tell 
them that such and such a text of scripture is 

(a) Titus iii. 10. 
4 



translated thus and thus, contrary to the true 
Greek, Hebrew, or ancient Latin copies on 1 
purpose, and to the only intent, to make it speak 
against such and such points of Catholic doctrine, 
and in favour of this or that new opinion of their 
own. 

Does it appear to be done by negligence, ig- 
norance, or mistake, as perhaps they would be 
willing to have the reader believe, or rather 
designedly and wilfully, when what they in some 
places translate truly, in places of controversy, 
between them and us, they grossly falsify, in 
favour of their errors ? 

Is it not a certain argument of a wilful cor- 
ruption, where they deviate from that text, and 
ancient reading, which has been used by all 
the fathers ; and instead thereof, to make the 
exposition or commentary of some one doctor, 
the very text of scripture itself 1 

So also when in their translations they fly 
from the Hebrew or Greek to the Vulgate Latin, 
where those originals make against them, or not. 
so much for their purpose, it is a manifest sign 
of wilful partiality: and this they frequently 
do. 

What is it else but wilful partiality, when lit 
words of ambiguous and divers significations, 
they will have it signify here or there, as pleases 
themselves ? So that in this place it must signify 
thus, in that place, not thus ; as Beza, and one 
of their English Bibles, for example, urge the 
Greek word ywalxa to signify wife, and not to 
signify wife, both against the virginity and 
chastity of priests. 

What is it but a voluntary and designed con- 
trivance, when in a case that makes for them, 
they strain the very original signification of the 
word ; and in the contrary case neglect it alto- 
gether ? Yet this they do. 

That their corruptions are voluntary and 
designedly done, is evident in such places where 
passives are turned into actives, and actives into 
passives ; where participles are made to disagree 
in case from their substantives ; where solcecisms 
are imagined when the construction is most 
agreeable ; and errors pretended to creep out of 
the margin into the text : but Beza made use of 
all these, and more such like quirks. 

Another note of wilful corruption is, when 
they do not translate alike such words as are of 
like form and force ; example : if Ulcerosus be 
read full of sores, why must not Grutiosa be 
translated full of grace ? 

When the words, images, shrines, procession, 
devotions, excommunications, &c. are used in 
ill part, where they are not in the orginal text ; 
and the words, hymns, grace, mystery, sacra- 
ment, church, altar, priest, Catholic, justifica- 
tion, tradition, &c. avoided and suppressed, 
where they are in the original, as if no such 
words were in the text : is it not an apparent 
token of design, and that it is done purposely 
to disgrace or suppress the said things and 
speeches ? 

Though Beza and Whitaker made it a good 
rule to translate according to the usual signi- 
fication, and not the original derivation of 



30 PROTESTANT 'J 

•words ; yet, contrary to this rule, they trans- 
late Idolum, an image ; Presbyter, an elder ; 
Diaconus, a minister ; Episcopus, an overseer, 
&c. Who sees not therefore but this is wilful 
partiality ? 

If where the Apostle names a Pagan idol- 
ater, and a Christian idolater, by one and the 
same Greek word, in one and the same meaning ; 
and they translate the Pagan (idolater) and the 
Christian (worshipper of images) by two distinct 
words, and in two divers meanings, it must needs 
be wilfully done. 

Nor does it appear to be less designedly done, 
to translate one and the same Greek word 
naqaSooig tradition, whensoever it may be taken 
for evil traditions ; and never so, when it spoken 
of good and apostolical traditions. 

So likewise, when they foist into their trans- 
lation the word tradition, taken in ill part, where 
it is not in the Greek ; and omit it where it is 
in the Greek, when taken in good part ; it is 
certainly a most wilful corruption. 

At their first revolt, when none were noted 
for schismatics and heretics but themselves, 
they translated division and sect, instead of 
schism and heresy ; and for heretic, translated 
an author of sects. This cannot be excused for 
voluntary corruption. 

But why should I multiply examples, when it 
is evident from their own confessions and ac- 
knowledgments ? For instance, concerning 
(teravoelTe, which the Vulgate Latin and Erasmus 
translate Agite panitentiam, " do penance :" 
" This interpretation," says Beza, " I refuse for 
many causes ; but for this especially, that many 
ignorant persons have taken hereby an occasion 
of the false opinions of satisfaction, wherewith 
the church is troubled at this day." 

Many other ways there are, to make most 
certain proofs of their wilfulness ; as when the 
translation is framed according to their false 
and heretical commentary ; and when they will 
avouch their translations out of profane writers, 
as Homer, Plutarch, Pliny, Tully, Virgil, and 
Terence, and reject the ecclesiastical use of 
words in the scriptures and fathers ; which is 
Beza's usual custom, whom our English trans- 
lators follow. But to note all their marks 
were too tedious a work, neither is it in this 
place necessary : these are sufficient to satisfy 
the impartial reader, that all those corruptions 
and falsifications were not committed either 
through negligence, ignorance, over-sight, or 
mistake, as perhaps they will be glad to pretend ; 
but designedly, wilfully, and with a malicious 
purpose and intention, to disgrace, dishonour, 
condemn, and suppress the church's catholic 
and apostolic doctrines and principles ; and to 
favour, defend, and bolster up their own new- 
devised errors, and monstrous opinions. And 
Beza is not far from confessing thus much, when 
against Castalio he thus complains : " The mat- 
ter," says he, " is now come to this point, that 
the translators of scripture out of the Greek 
into Latin, or into any other tongue, think that 
they may lawfully do any thing in translating ; 
whom if a man reprehend, he shall be answered 



TRANSLATIONS 

by and by, that they do the office of a translator, 
not who translates word for word, but who 
expresses the sense : so it comes to pass that 
whilst every man will rather freely follow his 
own judgment, than be a religious interpreter 
of the Holy Ghost, he rather perverts many 
things, than translates them." This is spoken 
well enough, if he had done accordingly. But, 
doing quite the contrary, is he not a dissembling 
hypocrite in so saying, and a wilful heretic in so 
doing ? 

Our quarrel with Protestant translators is 
not for trivial or slight faults, or for such verbal 
differences, or little escapes as may happen 
through the scarcely unavoidable mistakes of 
the transcribers or printers : no ! we accuse 
them of wilfully corrupting and falsifying the 
sacred text, against points of faith and mo- 
rals, (a) 

We deny not but several immaterial faults 
and depravations may enter into a translation, 
nor do we pretend that the Vulgate itself was 
free from such, before the correction of Sixtus 
V. and Clement VIII., which, through the mis- 
takes of printers, and, before printing, of tran- 
scribers, happened to several copies : so that a 
great many verbal differences, and lesser faults, 
were, by learned men, discovered in different 
copies : not that any material corruption in 
points of faith were found in all copies ; for such 
God Almighty's providence, as Protestants 
themselves confess, would never suffer to enter : 
and indeed these lesser depravations are not 
easily avoided, especially after several transcrip- 
tions of copies and impressions from the origi- 
nal, as we daily see in other books. 

To amend and rectify such, the church (as 
you may read in the preface to the Sixtine 
edition) has used the greatest industry imagi- 
nable. Pope Pius IV. caused not only the 
original languages, but other copies to be care- 
fully examined : Pius V. prosecuted that la- 
borious work ; and by Sixtus V. it was finished, 
who commanded it to be put to press, as 
appears by his bull, which begins, " Elernus 
ille Cxhslium" &c, Anno 1 585. Yet, notwith- 
standing the bull prefixed before his Bible, then 
printed, the same Pope Sixtus, as is seen in the 
preface, made Anno 1 592, after diligent exami- 
nation, found that no few faults slipped into his 
impression, by the negligence of the printers : 
and therefore, Censuit atque decrevit, he both 
judged and decreed to have the whole work 
examined and reprinted ; but that second cor- 
rection being prevented by his death, was after 
the very short reign of three other popes, un- 
dertaken, and happily finished by his successor 
Clement VIII., answerable to the desire and 
absolute intention of his predecessor, Sixtus : 
whence it is that the Vulgate, now extant, is 
called the correction of Sixtus, because this 
vigilant Pope, notwithstanding the endeavours 
of his two predecessors, is said to have begun 

(a) See a book entitled, Reason and Religion, cap. 
viii. , where the Sixtine and Clementine Bibles are more 
fully treated of. 



OF THE SCRIPTURE. 



31 



it, which was according to his desire, recognized 
and perfected by Clement VIII., and therefore 
is not undeservedly called also the Clementine 
Bible : so that Pope Sixtus's Bible, after Cle- 
ment's recognition, is now read in the church, 
as authentic, true scripture, and is the very best 
corrected copy of the Latin Vulgate. 

And whereas Pope Sixtus's bull enjoined 
that his Bible be read in all churches, without 
the least alteration ; yet this injunction supposed 
the interpreters and printers to have done ex- 
actly their duty every way, which was found 
wanting upon a second review of the whole work. 
Such commands and injunctions therefore, 
where new difficulties arise, not thought of 
before, are not, like definitions of faith, unalter- 
able ; but may and ought to be changed accord- 
ing to the legislator's prudence. What I say 
here is indisputable ; for how could Pope 
Sixtus, after a sight of such faults as caused 
him to intend another impression, enjoin no 
alteration, when he desired one, which his suc- 
cessor did for him 1 So that if Pope Sixtus 
had lived longer, he would as well have changed 
the Breve, as amended his impression. 

And whereas there were sundry different lec- 
tions of the Vulgate Latin, before the said cor- 
rection of Sixtus and Clement, the worthy doc- 
tors of Louvain, with an immense labour, placed 
in the margin of their Bible these different lec- 
tions of scripture ; not determining which read- 
ing was best, or to be preferred before others ; 
as knowing well, that the decision of such causes 
belongs to the public judicature and authority 
of the church. Pope Clement therefore, omit- 
ting no human diligence, compared lection with 
lection ; and after maturely weighing all, pre- 
ferred that which was most agreeable to the 
ancient copies, a thing necessary to be done 
for procuring one uniform lection of scripture 
in the church, approved of by the see apostolic. 
And from this arises that villanous calumny 
and open slander of Doctor Stillingfleet ; who 
affirms, that " the Pope took where he pleased 
the marginal annotations in the Louvain Bible, 
and inserted them into the text ;" whereas, I 
say, he took, not the annotations or commen- 
taries of the Louvain doctors, but the different 
readings of scripture found in several copies. 

Mr. James makes a great deal of noise about 
his impertinent comparisons between these two 
editions, and that of Louvain : yet among all his 
differences, he finds not one contrariety in any 
material point of faith or morals : and as for 
other differences, such as touch not faith and 
religion, arising from the expressions, being 
longer or shorter, less clear in the one, and 
more significant in the other ; or happening 
through the negligence of printers, they give 
him no manner of ground for his vain cavils ; 
especially seeing, I say, the Louvain Bible gave 
the different readings, without determining 
which was to be preferred ; and what faults 
were slipped into the Sixtine edition were by him 
observed, and a second correction designed ; 
which in the Clementine edition was perfected, 
and one uniform reading approved of. 



Against Thomas James's comparison, read 
the learned James Grester, who sufficiently dis- 
covers his untruths, with a " Mentito tertio 
Thomas James decern mill ia verb or mn," &c, after 
which, judge whether he hits every thing he 
says ; and whether the Vulgate Latin is to be 
corrected by the Louvain annotations, or these 
by the Vulgate, if any thing were amiss in either ? 
In fine, whether, if Mr James's pretended dif- 
ferences arise from comparing all with the 
Hebrew, Greek, and Chaldee, must we needs 
suppose him to know the last energy and force 
of every Hebrew, Greek, or Chaldee word, 
when there is a controversy, better than the 
authors of the Louvain, and correctors of the 
Vulgate Latin, the Sixtine-Clementine edition ? 
Again, let us demand of him, whether all his 
differences imply any material alteration in 
faith or morals, or introduce any notable error, 
contrary to God's revealed verities ? Or are they 
not rather mere verbal differences, grounded on 
the obscure signification of original words 1 In 
fine, if he or any for him, plead any material 
alteration, let them name any authentic copy, 
either original or translation ; by the indispu- 
table integrity whereof these supposed errors 
may be cancelled, and God's pure revealed 
verities put in their place. But to do this, after 
such immense labour and diligence used in the 
correction of the Vulgate, will prove a desperate 
impossibility. (a) 

Indeed, Mr. James might have just cause to 
exclaim, if he had found in these Bibles such 
corruptions as the Protestant apostle, Martin 
Luther, wilfully makes in his translations : as 
when he adds the word " alone" to the text, to 
maintain his heresy of" faith alone justifying ;"( b) 
and omits that verse, " But if you do not forgive, 
neither will your Father which is in heaven for- 
give your sins. "(c) He also omits these words, 
j " That you abstain from fornication :" (d) and 
because the word Trinity sounded coldly with 
him, he left out this sentence, which is the only 
text in the Bible that can be brought to prove 
that great mystery : " There are three who bear 
record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and 
the Holy Ghost, and these three are one." (e) Or 
if Mr. James had found such gross corruptions 
as that of Zuinglius, when instead of our blessed 
Saviour's postive words, " this is my body," he 
translates, " this is a sign of my body," to avoid 
the doctrine of the real presence, or such as are 
hereafter discovered in Protestant English 
translations : if, I say, he had met with such 
wilful and abominable corruptions as these, he 
might have had good cause of complaint ; but 
seeing the most he can make of all his painful 
comparisons comes but to this, viz., that he notes 
such faults, as Sixtus himself observed, after 
the impression was finished, and as Clement 
rectified ; I think he might have better employed 

(a) See the Preface to Sixtus V., Edit. Antwerp, 1599 ; 
and Bib. Max , Sext., 19, 20 ; Serarius, c. 19. 

(b) Rom. iii. 28. 

(c) Mark xi. 26. 

(d) 1 Thes. iv. 3. 
(c) John v. 7. 



32 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS OF THE SCRIPTURE. 



his time in correcting the gross and most into- 
lerable corruptions of the Protestant translation, 
than to have busied himself about so unnecessary 
a work : but there are a certain sort of men, 
who had rather employ themselves in discovering 
imaginary notes in their neighbours' eyes, than 
in clearing their own from real beams. 

To conclude this point, no man can be cer- 
tainly assured of the true scripture, unless he 
first come to a certainty of a true church, inde- 
pendently of scripture : find out therefore the 
true church, and we know, by the authority of 
our undoubted testimony, the true scripture ; 
for the infallible testimony of the church is ab- 
solutely necessary for assuring us of an authen- 
tic scripture. And this I cannot see how 
Protestants can deny, especially when they 
seriously consider, that in matters of religion, 
it must needs be an unreasonable thing to endea- 
vour to oblige any man to be tried by the scrip- 
tures of a false religion ; for who can in pru- 
dence require of a Christian to stand in debates 
of religion to the decisions of the scripture of 
the Turks, " the Alcoran ?" Doubtless, there- 
fore, when men appeal to such scripture for 
determining religious differences, their intention 
is to appeal to such scriptures, and such alone ; 
and to all such as are admitted by the true 
church : and how can we know what scriptures 
are admitted by the true church, unless we know 
which is the true church ?" (a) 

So likewise, touching the exposition of scrip- 
ture, without doubt, when Protestants fly to 
scriptures for their rule, whereby to square their 
leligion, and to decide debates between them and 
their adversaries, they appeal to scriptures as 
rightly understood : for who would be tried by 
scriptures understood in a wrong sense 1 Now 
when contests arise between them and others of 
different judgments concerning the right mean- 
ing of it ; certainly they will not deny, but the 
judge to decide this debate must appertain to the 
true religion ; for what Christian will apply him- 
self to a Turk or Jew to decide matters belong- 
ing to Christianity ? or who would go to an 
Atheist to determine matters of religion ? 

In like manner, when they are forced to have 
recourse to the private spirit in religious mat- 
ters, doubtless they design not to appeal to the 
private spirit of an Atheist, a Jew, or an He- 
retic, but to the private spirit of such as are of 
the true religion : and is it possible for them to 
know certainly who are members of the true 
church ? or what appertains to the true reli- 
gion, unless they be certainly informed " which 
is the true church ?" So that, I say, no man can 
be certainly assured which or what books, or 
how much is true scripture ; or of the right 
sense and true meaning of scripture, unless 
he first come to a certainty of the true church. 

(a) We must of necessity know the true church, be- 
fore we be certain either which is true scripture, or which 
is the true sense of scripture ; or by what spirit it is to 
beexponnded. And whether that church which has con- 
tinued visible in the world from Christ's time till this 
day, or that which was never known or heard of in the 
world till 1500 years after our Saviour, is the true 
church, let the world judge. 



And of this opinion was the great St. Augus- 
tine, when he declared, that " he would not be- 
lieve the Gospel, if it was not that the authority 
of the Catholic Church moved him to it :" Ego 
vero Evangelio non crederem, nisi me Ecclesi<e 
Catholicce commoveret authorilas . (b) 



OF THE CANONICAL BOOKS OF 
SCRIPTURE. 

The Catholic Church " setting this always be- 
fore her eyes, that, errors being removed, the 
very purity of the Gospel may be preserved in 
the church ; which being promised before by the 
prophets, in the holy scriptures, our Lord Jesus 
Christ, the Son of God, first published with his 
own mouth, and afterwards commanded to be 
preached, to every creature, by the apostles, as 
the fountain of all, the wholesome truth, and moral 
discipline contained in the written books, and in 
the traditions not written, &c, following the 
example of the orthodox fathers, and affected 
with similar piety and reverence ; doth receive 
and honour all the books both of the Old and 
New Testament, seeing one God is the author 
of both," &c. (c) These are the words of the 
sacred Council of Trent ; which further or- 
dained, that the table, or catalogue, of the cano- 
nical books should be joined to this decree, lest 
doubt might arise to any, which books they are 
that are received by the council. They are 
these following, viz. : 

Of the Old Testament. 

Five books of Moses ; that is, Genesis, Exo- 
dus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. 

Joshua, Judges, Ruth. 

Four of the Kings. 

Two of Paralipomenon. 

The first and second of Esdras, which is 
called Nehemias. 

Tobias, Judith, Hester, Job, David's Psalter 
of 150 Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canti- 
cles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Hieremias, 
with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel. 

Twelve lesser prophets ; that is, Osea, 
Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Michaeas, Na- 
hum, Abacuc, Sophonias, Aggeus, Zacharias, 
Malachias. 

The first and second of the Machabees. 

Of the New Testament. 

Four Gospels, according to St. Matthew, St. 
Mark, St. Luke, and St. John. 

The Acts of the Apostles, written by St. Luke 
the Evangelist. 

Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul, viz., to the 
Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the Gala- 
tians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, to 
the Colossians, to the Thessalonians, two to 
Timothy, to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews. 

Two of St. Peter the Apostle. 

(b) S. Aug., lib. contr. Epist. Manich., cap. v. 

(c) Concil. Trident, Sess. 4, Decret. de Canonicis 
Scripturis ; Mark c. ult. 



OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL 



33 



Three of St. John the Apostle. 

One of St. James the Apostle. 

One of St. Jude the Apostle. 

And the Apocalypse of St. John the Apostle. 

To which catalogue of sacred books is adjoined 
this decree : — 

" But if any man shall not receive for sacred 
and canonical these whole books, with all their 
parts, as they are accustomed to be read in the 
Catholic Church, and as they are in the old Vul- 
gate Latin edition, <fcc, be he anathema. " 

The third Council of Carthage, after having 
decreed, that nothing should be read in the 
church under the name of divine scripture, but 
canonical scriptures, says, " that the canonical 
scriptures are Genesis, Exodus," &c. ; (a) so 
reckoning up all the very same books, and mak- 
ing particularly the same catalogue of them, 
with this recited out of the Council of Trent. St. 
Augustine, who was present at, and subscribed 
to, this council, also numbers the same books as 
above, (b) 

Notwithstanding which, several of the said 
books are by the Protestants rejected as Apo- 
cryphal : their reasons are, because they are not 
in the Jewish canon, and were not accepted for 
canonical in the primitive church ; reasons by 
which they might reject a great many more, if 
it pleased them : but, indeed, the chief cause is, 
that some things in these books are so mani- 
festly against their opinions, that they have no 
other answer but to reject their authority, as 
appears very plainly from those words of Mr. 
Whitaker : " We pass not," says he, " for that 
Raphael mentioned in Tobit, neither acknow- 
ledge we these seven angels whereof he makes 
mention ; all that differs much from canonical 
scripture, which is reported of that Raphael, 
and savours of, I know not what, superstition. 
Neither will I believe free will, although the 
book of Ecclesiasticus confirms it an hundred 
times." (c) This denying of books to be canoni- 
cal, because the Jews received them not, was 
also an old heretical shift, noted and refuted by 
St. Augustine, touching the book of Wisdom ; 
(d) which some in his time refused, because it 
refuted their errors : but must it pass for a 
sufficient reason amongst Christians to deny 
such books, because they are not in the canon 
of the Jews ? Who sees not that the canon of 
the Church of Christ is of more authority with 
all true Christians, than that of the Jews ? For 
a " canon is an assured rule, and warrant of 
direction, whereby (says St. Augustine,) the 
infirmity of our defect in knowledge is guided, 
and by which rule other books are known to be 
God's word :" his reason is, " because we have 
no other assurance than the books of Moses, 
the four Gospels, and other books, are the true 
word of God, but by the canon of the church." 



(a) 3 Concil. Carthag., Can. 47. 

(b) Vid. Doctr. Christian., lib. 2, c. viii. 

(c) Whit, confr. Camp., p. 17. 

(d) S. Aug., lib. de Praedest. Sanct, c. 14. 



(e) Whereupon the same great doctor uttered 
that famous saying : " I would not believe the 
Gospel, except the authority of the Catholic 
Church moved me thereto," 

And, that these books which the Protestants 
reject, are by the church numbered in the sacred 
canon, may be seen above : however, to speak 
of them in particular, in their order : 



THE BOOK OF TOBIAS 

Is, by St. Cyprian, " de Oratione Dominica" 
alleged as divine scripture, to prove that prayer 
is good with fasting and alms. St. Ambrose 
calls this book by the common name of scripture, 
saying, " he will briefly gather the virtues of 
Tobias, which the scripture in an historical 
manner lays forth at large ;"(/) calling also this 
history prophetical, and Tobias a prophet : and 
in another place, he alleges this book, as he 
does other holy scriptures, to provide that the 
virtues of God's servants far excel those of the 
moral philosophers, (g) St. Augustine made a 
special sermon of Tobias, as he did of Job. (h) 
St. Chrysostom alleges it as scripture, denounc- 
ing a curse against the contemners of it. (;) 
St. Gregory also alleges it as holy scripture, (k) 
St. Bede expounds this whole book mystically, 
as he does other holy scriptures. St. Hierom 
translated it out of the Chaldee language, 
" judging it more meet to displease the Phari- 
saical Jews, who reject it, than not to satisfy the 
will of holy bishops, urging to have it." Ep. 
ad Chromat. et Heliodorum. To. 3. In fine, 
St. Augustine tells us the cause of its being 
written, in these words : "The servant of God, 
holy Tobias, is given to us after the law, for an 
example, that we might know how to practise 
the things which we read. And if temptations 
come upon us, not to depart from the fear of 
God, nor expect help from any other but from 
him." 



OF THE BOOK OF JUDITH. 

This book was, by Origen, Tertiillian, and 
other fathers, whom St. Hilary cites, held for 
canonical, before the first general Council of 
Nice ; yet St. Hierom supposed it not so, till 
such time as he found that the said sacred coun- 
cil reckoned it in the number of canonical scrip- 
tures ; after which he so esteemed it, that he not 
only translated it out of the Chaldee tongue, 
wherein it was first written, but also, as occasion 
required, cited the same as divine scripture, and 



(e) S. Aug., lib. 11, c. 5, contra Faustum, et lib. 2,c. 
32, contra Cesconiuin. 

(/) S. Amb., lib. de Tobia. c. i. 
\g) Lib. 3, Offic., c. 14. 

(h) S. Aug., Serm., 226. de Tem. 

(i) S. Chrysost., Horn. 15, ad Heb. 

(/c) S. Greg., part. 3, Pastor, curee admon. 21. 



34 



OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PRO 



TESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL. 



sufficient to convince matters of faith in contro- 
versy, numbering it with other scriptures, where- 
of none doubts, saying, " Ruth, Hester, Judith, 
were of so great renown, that they gave names 
to the sacred volumes." (a) St. Ambrose, St. 
Augustine, St. Chrysostom, and many other holy 
fathers, account it for canonical scripture. 



PART OF THE BOOK OF HESTER. 

By the Council of Laodicea and Carthage, 
this book was declared canonical ; and by most 
of the ancient fathers esteemed as divine scrip- 
ture ; only two or three, before the said coun- 
cils, doubted of its authority. And though St. 
Hierom in his time, found not certain parts 
thereof in the Hebrew, yet in the Greek he 
found all the sixteen chapters contained in ten : 
and it is not improbable that these parcels were 
sometime in the Hebrew, as divers whole books 
which are now lost. But whether they ever 
were so or not, the church of Christ accounts 
the whole book of infallible authority, reading 
as well these parts, as the rest in her public of- 
fice, (b) 



OF THE BOOKS OF WISDOM. 

It is granted, that several of the ancient 
fathers would not urge these books of Wisdom, 
and others, in their writings against the Jews, 
not that themselves doubted of their authority ; 
but because they knew that they would be rejec- 
ted by the Jews as not canonical : and so St. 
Hierom, with respect to the Jews, said these 
books were not canonical ; nevertheless, he often 
alleged testimonies out of them, as from other 
divine scriptures ; sometimes with this paren- 
thesis, Si cui tamen placet Ubrum recipere, in cap. 
viii. andxii. Zachariae : but in his latter writings 
absolutely without any such restriction, as in 
cap. i. and lvi. Isaiae, and in xviii. Jeremiae ; 
where he professes to allege none but canoni- 
cal scripture, (c) As for the other ancient 
fathers, namely, St. Irenams, St. Clement of 
Alexandria. Origen, St. Athanasius, St. Basil, 
St. Gregory Nazianzen, St. Gregory Nyssen, 
St. Epiphanius, St. Cyril of Alexandria, St. 
Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, &c, they make no 
doubt at all of their being canonical scripture, 
as appears by their express terms, "divine scrip- 
ture, divine word, sacred letters, prophetical 
sayings, the Holy Ghost saith, and the like." 
And St. Augustine affirms, that, " the sentence of 
the books of Wisdom ought not to be rejected 
by certain, inclining to Pelagianism, which has 



(a) See the Argument in the Book of Judith in the 
Doway Bible, Tom. 1. 

(t) Vide Doway Bible, Tom. 1. 

(c) Vine Doway Bible, Tom. 2, and Jodoc, Coce. 
Tom. 1. Thesan. 6, Art. 9. 



so long been publicly read in the chureh of 
Christ, and received by all Christians, bishops, 
and others, even to the last of the laity, penitents, 
and catechumens, cum vencratione Divinai au- 
thoritatis, with veneration of divine authority ? 
Which also the excellent writers, next to the 
apostles' times, alleging for witness, nihil se 
adhibere nisi divinum testimonium crediderunt, 
thought they alleged nothing but divine testi- 
mony, (d) 



OF ECCLESIASTICUS. 

What has been said of the foregoing book, 
may be said also of this. The holy fathers above 
named, and several others, as St. Cyprian, de 
Opere et Eleemosyna, St. Gregory the Great, 
in Psal. 1. It is also reckoned for canonical 
by the third Council of Carthage, and by St. Au- 
gustine, in lib. c. 8, Doct. Christian, et lib. 17, c. 
20, Civit Dei. 



Of BARUCH, with the Epistle of JEREMY. 

Many 7 of the ancient Fathers supposed this 
prophecy to be Jeremiah's, though none of them 
doubted but Baruch, his scribe, was the writer of 
it ; not but that the Holy Ghost directed him in 
it : and therefore by the fathers and councils 
it has ever been accepted as divine scripture. 
The Council of Laodicea, in the last canon, ex- 
pressly names Baruch, Lamentations, and Je- 
remiah's Epistle, (e) St. Hierom testifies, that 
he found it in the Vulgate Latin edition, and that 
it contains many things of Christ, and the latter 
times ; though because he found it not in the 
Hebrew, nor in the Jewish canon, he urges it not 
against them. ( / ) It is by the Councils of Flo- 
rence and Trent expressly defined to be canoni- 
cal scripture. 



Of the SONG of the THREE CHILDREN, 
the IDOL, BELL, and the DRAGON, with 
the STORY OF SUSANNAH. 

It is no just exception against these and other 
parts of holy scripture of the Old Testament, 
to say, they are not in the Hebrew edition, 
being otherwise accepted for canonical by the 
Catholic Church : and further, it is very pro- 
bable, that these parcels were sometimes either 
in the Hebrew or Chaldee ; in which two lan- 
guages, part in one, and part in the other, the 



(d) S. Aug. in lib.de Prsedestinat. Sanct., cap. 14. Et 
lib. de Civit. Dei, 17, c. 20. 

(e) See the Argument of Baruch's Prophecy in the 
Doway Bible, To. 2. 

(/) St. Hierom., in Prafat. Jeremiae. 



OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL. 



35 



rest of the book of Daniel was written ; for 
from whence could the Septuagint, Theodotion, 
Symmachus, and Aquila translate them 1 in 
whose editions St. Hierom found them. But if 
it be objected, that St. Hierom calls them fables, 
and so did not account them canonical scripture ; 
we answer, that he, reporting the Jewish opinion, 
uses their terms, not explaining his own judg- 
ment, intending to deliver sincerely what he 
found in the Hebrew ; yet would he not omit 
to insert the rest, advertising withal, that he had 
it in Theodotion's translation ; which answer is 
clearly justified by his own testimony, in these 
words : " Whereas I relate," says he, " what the 
Hebrews say against the Hymn of the Three 
Children ; he that for this reputes me a fool, 
proves himself a sycophant ; for I did not write 
what myself judged, but what they are accus- 
tomed to say against me." (a) 

The Prayer of Azarias is alleged as divine 
scripture, by St. Cyprian, St. Ephrem, St. 
Chrysostom, St. Augustine, St. Fulgentius, and 
others, (b) The Hymn of the Three Children 
is alleged for divine scripture, by divers holy 
fathers, as also by St. Hierom himself, in cap. iii. 
ad Galatos et Epist. 49, de Muliere Septies icla ; 
also by St. Ambrose and the Council of Toledo, 
c. 13. 

So likewise the History of Susannah is cited 
for holy scripture, by St. Ignatius, Tertullian, 
St. Cyprian, St. Chrysostom, who in Horn. 7, 
fine, has a whole sermon on Susannah, as upon 
holy scripture : St. Ambrose and St. Augustine 
cite the same also as canonical. 

The History of Bell and the Dragon is judged 
to be divine scripture ; St. Cyprian, St. Basil, 
and St. Athanasius, in Synopsi, briefly explica- 
ting the argument of the book of Daniel, make 
express mention of the Hymn of the Three 
Children, of the History of Susannah, and of 
Bell and the Dragon. 



OF THE TWO BOOKS OF 
MACCABEES. 

Ever since the third Council of Carthage, 
these two books of the Maccabees have been 
held for sacred and canonical by the Catholic 
Church, as is proved by a council of seventy 
bishops, under Pope Gelasius ; and by the 
sixth general council, in approving the third of 
Carthage ; as also by the councils of Florence 
and Trent. 

But because some of the Church of England 
divines would seem to make their people believe 
that the Maccabees were not received as cano- 
nical scripture in Gregory the Great's time, 
consequently not before, (c) I will, besides these 
councils, refer you to the holy fathers who lived 
before St. Gregory's days, and alleged these 

(a) S. Hier., lib. 2. c. 9, adveis. Ruffin. 

(b) Vide Doway Bible, Tom. 2. 

(c) See the Second Vindication of the Exposition of the 
Doctrine of the Church of England. 



two books of the Maccabees as divine scripture, 
namely, St. Clement Alexandrinus, lib. i. 
Stromal. ; St. Cyprian, lib. i., Epistolarum, 
Ep. iii. ad Cornelium, lib. iv. ; Ep. i. et de Ex- 
hort, ad Martyrium, c. xi. St. Isidorus, lib. 
xvi., c. 1. St. Gregory Nazianzen has also a 
whole oration concerning the seven Maccabees 
martyrs, and their mother. St. Ambrose, lib. i., 
c. 41, Offic. See in St. Hierom's Commentaries 
upon Daniel, c. i., 11 and 12, in how great 
esteem he had these books, though, because he 
knew they were not in the Jewish canon, he 
would not urge them against the Jews. And 
the great doctor St. Augustine, in lib. ii., c- 8, 
de Doctrina Christiana, et lib. 18, c. 36, de 
Civil. Dei, most clearly avouches, that, " Not- 
withstanding the Jews deny these books, the 
church holds them canonical." And whereas 
one Gaudentius, an heretic, alleged, for defence 
of his heresy, the example of Razias, who slew 
himself, 2 Mac. xiv., St. Augustine denies not 
the authority of the book, but discusses the fact, 
and admonishes, that it is not unprofitably re- 
ceived by the church, " if it be read or heard 
soberly," which was a necessary admonition to 
those Donatists, who, not understanding the 
holy scriptures, depraved them, as St. Peter 
says of like heretics, to their own perdition. 
Which testimonies, I think, may be sufficient to 
satisfy any one who is not pertinacious and ob- 
stinate, that these two books of the Maccabees, 
as well as others • in the New Testament, were 
received, and held for canonical scripture, long 
before St. Gregory the Great's time. 

Judge now, good reader, whether the author 
of the second vindication, &c, has not imposed 
upon the world in this point of the books of the 
Maccabees. And indeed if this were all the 
cheat he endeavours to put upon us, it were 
well, but he goes yet further, and names eleven 
points of doctrine besides this, which he, with 
his fellows, quoted in his margin, falsely affirms 
not to have been taught in England by St. 
Augustine, the Benedictine monk, when he 
converted our nation ; telling us, " that the mys- 
tery of iniquity," as he blasphemously terms the 
doctrine of Christ's holy church, " was not 
then come to perfection." For, first, says he, 
" the scripture was yet received as a perfect 
rule of faith." Secondly, " the books of the 
Maccabees, which you now put in your cannon, 
were rejected then as apocryphal." Thirdly, 
" that good works were not yet esteemed meri- 
torious." Fourthly, " nor auricular confession 
a sacrament." Fifthly, " that solitary masses 
were disallowed by him." And sixthly, " tran- 
substantiation yet unborn." Seventhly, " that the 
sacrament of the Eucharist was hitherto admi- 
nistered in both kinds." What then ? so it was 
also in one kind. Eighthly, "purgatory itself 
not brought either to certainty or to perfection." 
Ninthly, " that by consequence masses for the 
dead were not intended to deliver souls from 
these torments." Tenthly, " nor images allowed 
for any other purpose than for ornament and 
instruction." Eleventhly, " that the sacrament 
of extreme unction was yet unformed." Then 



36 



OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL. 



ou must, with your master, Luther, count St. 
James's Epistle, an epistle of straw. Twelfthly, 
" and even the Pope's supremacy was so far from 
being then established as it now is, that Pope 
Gregory thought it to be the forerunner of an- 
tichrist for one bishop to set himself above all 
me rest." 

I will only, in particular, take notice here of 
this last of his false instances, because he cites 
and misapplies the words of St. Gregory the 
Great, to the deluding of his reader : whereas j 
St. Gregory did not think it antichristian of 
unlawful for the Pope, whom (not himself, but) 
our Saviour Christ had set and appointed, in 
the person of St. Peter, above all the rest, to 
exercise spiritual supremacy and jurisdiction 
over all the bishops in the Christian world : but j 
he thought it antichristian for any bishop to set ; 
up himself, as John, bishop of Constantinople, 
had done, by the name or title of universal 
bishop, so as if he alone were the sole bishop, 
and no bishop but he, in the universe : and in 
this sense St. Gregory thought this name or 
title not only worthily forborne by his prede- 
cessors, and by himself, but terms it profane, ; 
sacrilegious, and antichristian ; and in this sense 
the bishops of Rome have always utterly re- 
nounced the title of universal bishop ; on the 
contrary, terming themselves Servi Servorum 
Dei. And this is proved from the words of 
Androeus Friccius, a Protestant, whom Peter 
Martyr terms an excellent and learned man. 
" Some there are," says he, " that object to the 
authority of Gregory, who says, that such a 
title pertains to the precursor of antichrist ; but 
the reason of Gregory is to be known, and may 
be gathered from his words, which he repeats in 
many epistles, that the title of universal bishop 
is contrary to, and doth gainsay the grace 
which is commonly poured upon all bishops ; he 
therefore, who calls himself the only bishop, 
takes the episcopal power from the rest : where- 
fore this title he would have rejected, &c. But 
it is nevertheless evident by other places, that 
Gregory thought that the charge and principality 
of the whole church was committed to Peter, 
&c, and yet for this cause Gregory thought not 
that Peter was the forerunner of antichrist." 
(a) Thus evidently and clearly this Protestant 
writer explains this difficulty. 

To this may be added the testimonies of other 
Protestants, who, from the writings of St. Gre- 
gory, clearly prove the bishop of Rome to have 
had and exercised a power and jurisdiction, not 
only over the Greek, but over the universal 
church. The Magdeburgian Centurists show 
us, that the Roman see appoints her watch over 
the whole world ; that the apostolic see is head 
of all churches ; that even Constantinople is 
subject to the apostolic see. (b) These Cen- 
turists charge moreover the bishop of Rome, 
in the very example and person of Pope Gre- 
gory, and by collection out of his writings, by 
them particularly alleged, " that he challenged 

(a) Andrseus Friccius. de Ecclesia. 1 . 2, c. 10, p. 579. 
(A) Centur. 6, Col. 425, 426, 427, 428, 429, 438. 



to himself power to command all archbishops, 
to ordain and depose bishops at his pleasure." 
And, " that he claimed a right to cite archbishops 
to declare their cause before him, when they 
were accused." And also, " to excommunicate 
and depose them, giving commission to their 
neighbour bishops to proceed against them." 
That, " in their provinces he placed his legates 
to know and end the causes of such as appealed 
to the see of Rome." (c) With much more, 
touching the exercise of his supremacy. To 
which Doctor Saunders adds yet more out 
of St. Gregory's own works, and in his own 
words, as, " that the see apostolic, by the 
authority of God, is preferred before all 
churches. That all bishops, if any fault be 
found in them, are subject to the see apostolic. 
That she is the head of faith, and of all the 
faithful members. That the see apostolic is 
the head of all churches. That the Roman 
Church, by the words which Christ spake to 
Peter, was made the head of all churches. 
That no scruple or doubt ought to be made of 
the faith of the see apostolic. That all those 
things are false, which are taught contrary to 
the doctrine of the Roman Church. That to 
return from schism to the Catholic Church, is to 
return to the communion of the bishops of Rome. 
That he who will not have St. Peter, to whom 
the keys of heaven were committed, to shut him 
out from the entrance of life, must not in this 
world be separated from his see. That they 
are perverse men, who Tefuse to obey the see 
apostolic." (d) 

Considering all these words of Pope Gregory, 
does not this vindicator of the Church of Eng- 
land's doctrine show himself a grand imposter, 
to offer to the abused judgment of his unlearned 
readers, an objection so frivolous and misapplied, 
by the "advantage only of a naked, sounding 
resemblance of mistaken words 1 To conclude, 
therefore, in the words of Doctor Saunders : 
" he who reads all these particulars, and more 
of the same kind that are to be found in the 
works of St. Gregory, and with a brazen fore- 
head, fears not to interpret that which he wrote 
against the name of universal bishop, as if he 
could not abide that any one bishop should have 
the chief seat, and supreme government of the 
whole militant church ; that man, says he, 
seems to me either to have cast off all under- 
standing and sense of man, or else to have put 
on the obstinate perverseness of the devil." (e) 

It is not my business in this place, to digress 
into particular replies against his other false 
instances (/) of the difference between the doc- 
trine of Pope Gregory the Great, and that of 
the Council of Trent : I will therefore, in ge- 
neral, oppose the words of a Protestant bishop 
against this Protestant ministerial guide, and so 
submit them to the consideration of the judicious 
reader. 

(c) Vid. praeced. Notas. 

(d) Dr. Saund. Visit. Monar., lib. 7, a N. 433, 541. 

(e) Dr. Saunders supra. 

(/) You will find some of them hinted at in other 
places as occasion offers. 



OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PRO 



TESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL. 



37 



John Bale, a Protestant bishop, affirms, (a) 
that " the religion preached by St. Augustine to 
the Saxons was, altars, vestments, images, 
chalices, crosses, censors, holy vessels, holy 
waters, the sprinkling thereof, relics, translation 
of relics, dedicating of churches to the bones 
and ashes of saints, consecration of altars, cha- 
lices and corporals, consecration of the font of 
baptism, chrism and oil, celebration of mass, 
the archiepiscopal pall at solemn mass time, 
Romish mass books ; also free will, merit, justi- 
fication of works, penance, satisfaction, purga- 
tory, the unmarried life of priests, the public 
invocation of saints and their worship, the 
worship of images." (b) In another place, he 
says, that " Pope Leo the first decreed, that men 
should worship the images of the dead, and al- 
lowed the sacrifice of the mass, exorcism, par- 
dons, vows, monachism, transubstantiation, 
prayer for the dead, offering the healthful host of 
Christ's body and blood for the dead, the Roman 
bishop's claim and exercise of jurisdiction and 
supremacy over all churches, reliquum ponti- 
Jicim super stitionis chaos, even the whole chaos 
of Popish superstitions." He tells us, that 
" Pope Innocent, who lived long before St. 
Gregory's time, made the anointing of the sick 
to be a sacrament." (c) 

These are Bishop Bale's words ; which this 
vindicator would do well to reconcile with his 
own. The like may be found in other Protes- 
tants ; namely, in Doctor Humphrey, in Jesui- 
tismi, partii., the Centurists, &c. 

But now to return to the place where we oc- 
casionally entered into this digression : you see 
by what authority and testimonies both of 
councils and fathers we have proved these 
books, which Protestants reject, to be canonical : 
yet, if a thousand times more were said, it would 
be all the same with the perverse innovators of 
our age, who are resolved to be obstinate, and, 
after their bold and licentious manner, to receive 
or reject what they please ; still following the 
steps of their first masters, who tore out of the 
Bible, some one book, some another, as they 
found them contrary to their erroneous and he- 
retical opinions. For example : 

Whereas Moses was the first that ever wrote 
any part of the scripture, and he who wrote the 
law of God, the ten commandments ; yet Luther 
thus rejects both him and his ten command- 
ments : (d) " We will neither hear nor see 
Moses, for he was given only to the Jews ; nei- 
ther does he belong in any thing to us." " I," 
says he, " will not receive (e) Moses with his 
law ; for he is the enemy of Christ." (f) " Mo- 
ses is the master of all hangmen." (g) " The ten 
commandments belong not to Christians." " Let 
the ten commandments be altogether rejected, 

(a) Bale in Act. Rom. Pontif,. Edit. Basil., 1658, p. 
44, 45, 46, 47, et Cent. I , Col. 3. 

(b) Pageant of Popes, fol. 27. 

(c) Pageant of the Popes, fol. 66. 

(d) Tom. 3, Germ., fol. 40, 41, and in Colloq. Mensal., 
Ger., fol. 152, 153. 

(e) In Coloc. Mensal., c. de Lege et Evan. 
(/) Ibid., fol. 118. 

(g) Serm. de Mose. 

5 



and all heresy will presently cease ; for the ten 
commandments are, as it were, the fountain from 
whence all heresies spring." (h) 

Islebius, Luther's scholar, taught, (i) that 
" the decalogue was not to be taught in the 
church :" and from this came (k) the sect of 
Antinomians, who publicly taught, that " the 
law of God is not worthy to be called the word 
of God : if thou art an whore, if an whore- 
monger, if an adulterer, or otherwise a sinner, 
believe, and thou walkest in the way of salva- 
tion. When thou art drowned in sin even to 
the bottom, if thou believest, thou art in the 
midst of happiness. All that busy themselves 
about Moses, that is, the ten commandments, 
belong to the devil ; to the gallows with 
Moses." (/) 

Martin Luther believes not all things to be so 
done, as they are related in the book of Job : 
with him it is, " as it were, the argument of a 
fable." (m) 

Castalio commanded the canticles of Solomon 
to be thrust out of the canon, as an impure and 
obscene song ; reviling with bitter reproaches, 
such ministers, as resisted him therein, (n) 

Porneran, a great evangelist among the Luther- 
ans, writes thus touching St. James's Epistle : 
" He concludes ridiculously, he cites scripture 
against scripture, which thing the Holy Ghost 
cannot abide : wherefore that epistle may not be 
numbered among other books, which set forth the 
justice of faith." (o) 

Vitus Theodorus, a Protestant preacher, of 
Nuremberg, writes thus : " The Epistle of James 
and Apocalypse of John, we have of set purpose 
left out, because the Epistle of James is not only 
in certain places reprovable, where he too much 
advances works against faith ; but also his doc- 
trine throughout is patched together with divers 
pieces, whereof no one agrees with another. "(p) 
■ The Magdeburgian Centurists say, that " the 
Epistle of James much swerves from the analogy 
of the apostolical doctrine, whereas it ascribes 
justification not only to faith, but to works, and 
calls the law, a law of liberty." (q) 

John Calvin doubted whether the apostles' 
creed was made by the apostles. He argued St. 
Matthew of error. He rejected these words : 
" many are called, but few are chosen." (r) 

Clemitius, an eminent Protestant, opposes the 
evangelists one against another : " Matthew and 
Mark," says he, " deliver the contrary ; there- 
fore to Matthew and Mark, being two witnesses, 
more credit is to be given than to one Luke," 
&c. (s) 

<h) In Convival. Colloq. cited by Auri faber, cap. de 
Lege. 

(i) See Osiander, Cent. 16, p. 311,312, 320. 

(k) Sleidan, Hist, 1, 12, fol. 162. 

(l) Vid. Confessio. Mansfieldensium Ministrorum 
Tit. de Antinomis, fol. 89, 90. 

(m) In Serm. Convival. Tit. de Patriarch, et Prophet., 
et Tit. de libiis Vet. et. Nov. Test. 

(n) Vid. Beza in Vita Calvini. 

(o) Pomeran. ad Rom., c. 8. 

(p) In Annot. in Nov. Test., pag. ult. 

(?) Cent. I., 1,2, c. 4, Col. 54. 

(r) Inst., 1, 2, c. 16. In Matt. 27, Harm, in Matt. 20,16. 
(s) Victoria Veritatia et Ruina Papatus, Arg. 5. 



38 



OF SUCH BOOKS AS PROTESTANTS CALL APOCRYPHA. 



Zuinglins and other Protestants affirm, that 
" all things in St. Paul's Epistles are not sacred ; 
and that in sundry things he erred." (a) 

Mr. Rogers, the great labourer to our English 
convocation men, names several of his Protestant 
brethren, who rejected for apocryphal the Epis- 
tle of Paul to the Hebrews, of St. James, the 
first and second of John, of Jude, and the Apoc- 
alypse." (6) 

Thus, you see, these pretended reformers 
have torn out, some one piece or book of sacred 
scripture, some another ; with such a licentious 
freedom, rejecting, deriding, discarding, and 
censuring them, that their impiety can never be 
paralleled but by professed Atheists. Yet all 
these sacred books were, as is said, received for 
canonical in the third Council of Carthage, above 
thirteen hundred years ago. 

But, with the Church of England, it matters 
not by what authority books are judged canonical, 
if the Holy Spirit, in the hearts of her children, 
testify them to be from God. They telling us, 
by Mr. Rogers, that they judge such and such 
books canonical, " not so much because learned 
and godly men in the church so have, and do 
receive and allow them, as for that the Holy 
Spirit in our hearts doth testify, that they are 
from God." By instinct of which private Spirit 
in their hearts, they decreed as many as they 
thought good for canonical, and rejected the 
rest ; as you may see in the sixth of the Thirty- 
nine Articles, (c) 



OF SUCH BOOKS AS PROTESTANTS 
CALL APOCRYPHA. 

The Church of England has decreed, (d) that 
" such are to be understood canonical books of 
the Old and New Testament, of whose authority 
there was never any doubt in the church :" and 
therefore, by this rule she rejects these for apoc- 
ryphal, viz., 

Tobit. 
Judith. 

The rest of Esther. 

Wisdom. 

Ecclesiasticus. 

Baruch, with the Epistle of Jeremiah. 
The Song of the Three Children. 
The Idol, Bell, and the Dragon. 
The Story of Susannah. 
Maccabees I. 
Maccabees II. 
Manesseth, Prayer of. 
Esdras III. 
Esdras IV. (e) 

(a) Tom. 2, Elench., f. 10. Magdeburg. Cent. 1, 1. 
0, c. 10. Col. 580. 

(b) Defence of the 39 Articles, Art. 6. 

(c) The private spirit, not the church, told those Pro- 
testants who made the 39 Articles, what books of scrip- 
ture they were to hold for canonical. 

(d) In the 6th of the 39 Articles. 

(e) The three last are not numbered in the canon of 
the scripture. 



But if none must pass for canonical, but such as 
were never doubted of in the church, I would 
know why the Church of England admits of 
such books of the New Testament as have for- 
merly been doubted of? " Some ancient writers 
doubted of the last chapter of St. Mark's Gos- 
pel : (/ ) others of some part of the 22nd of St. 
Luke ; (g) some of the beginning of the 8th of 
St. John ; (h) others of the Epistle to the He- 
brews ; (i) and others of the Epistles of St. 
James, Jude, the second of Peter, the second 
and third of John, and the Apocalypse." (k) 

And Doctor Bilson, a Protestant, affirms, that 
" the scriptures were not fully received in all 
places, no, not in Eusebius's time." He says, 
" the Epistles of James, Jude, the second of 
Peter, the second and third of John, are contra- 
dicted, as not written by the apostles. The 
epistle to the Hebrews was for a while contra- 
dicted," &c. The churches of Syria did not re- 
ceive the second Epistle of Peter, nor the second 
and third of John, nor the Epistle of Jude, nor 
the Apocalypse. The like might be said for the 
churches of Arabia : will you hence conclude, 
says this doctor, that these parts of scripture 
were not apostolic, or that we need not receive 
them now, because they were formerly doubted 
of? Thus Doctor Bilson. (I) 

And Mr. Rogers confesses, that " although 
some of the ancient fathers and doctors accepted 
not all the books contained in the New Testa- 
ment for canonical ; yet in the jend, they were 
wholly taken and received by the common con- 
sent of the Church of Christ, in this world, for 
the very Word of God," &c. (m) 

Arid, by Mr. Rogers and the Church of Eng- 
land's leave, so were also those books which they 
call Apocrypha. For though they were, as we 
do not deny, doubted of by some of the ancient 
fathers, and not accepted for canonical : " yet 
in the end," to use Mr. Rogers' words, they 
were wholly taken and received by the common 
consent of the Church of Christ, in this world, 
for the very Word of God. "(n) Vide third Coun- 
cil of Carthage, which decrees, " that nothing 
should be read in the church, under the name of 
divine scriptures, besides canonical scriptures :" 
and denning which are canonical, reckons those 
which the Church of England rejects as apocry- 
phal." To this council St. Augustine subscribed, 
who, (o) with St. Innocent, (p) Gelasius, and 
other ancient writers, number the said books in 
the canon of the scripture. And Protestants 
themselves confess, they were received in the 
number of canonical scriptures, (q.) 

(/) See St. Hierom. epist. ad Hed. q. 3. 

(g) S. Hilar. 1 10, de Trin., et Hierom, 1. 2, contr. 
Pelagian. 

(h) Euseb. H., 1.3, c. 39. 

(i) Id., 1. 3, c. 3. 

(k) Et, c. 25, 28. Hierom Divinis Illust., in P. Jac. 
Jud. Pet. et Joan., et Ep. ad Dardan. 

(I) Survey of Christ. SufF., p. 664. Vid. 1st and 4th 
day's Confer, in the Tower, anno 1581. 

(rn) Def. of the 39 Articles, p. 31, Art. 6. 

(n) Third Council of Carthage, Can. 47. 

(o) De Doct. Christian., 1. 2, c.8. 

(p) Epist. ad Exuper., c. 7. 

(q) Tom. 1, Cone. Decret. cum 70 Episcop. 



OF SUCH BOOKS AS PROTESTANTS CALL APOCRYPHA. 



39 



Brentius, a Protestant, says, " there are some 
of the ancient fathers, who receive these apoc- 
ryphal books into the number of canonical 
scriptures ; and also some councils command 
them to be acknowledged as canonical. "(a) 

Doctor Covel also affirms of all these books, 
that, " if Ruffinus be not deceived, they were 
approved of, as parts of the Old Testament, by 
the apostles. "(6) 

So that what Christ's Church receives as 
canonical, we are not to doubt of: Doctor Fulk 
avouches, that " the Church of Christ has judg- 

(a) Brentius Apol. Conf. Wit. Bucer's scripta. Ang., 
p. 713. 

(A) Covel cont. Burg., pp. 76, 77, 78. 



ment to discern true writing from counterfeit, 
and the Word of God from the writings of men ; 
and this judgment she has of the Holy Ghost." 
(c) And Jewel says, " the Church of God has 
the spirit of wisdom to discern true scripture 
from false. ,: (d) 

To conclude, therefore, in the words of the 
Council of Trent : " If any man shall not receive 
for sacred and canonical these whole books, with 
all their parts, as they are read in the Catholic 
Church, and as they are in the Vulgate Latin 
edition, let him be accursed. "(c) 

ic) Fulk An. to a Countr. Cathol., p. 5. 

(d) Jewel Def. of the Apol., p. 201. 

(e) Concil. Trid., Sess. 4, Deer, de Can. Scrip 



40 



I. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683, 


St. Matth. 
chap. xvi. 
verse 18. 


Et ego dico tibi, 
quia tu es Petrus, 

s> f , . , , -.- h sin/* r~^P t " 

fill OWlJtf fltt/llf J. CI 

ram <edijicabo " ec- 
clesiarn meam" (io 
r^v Ixxlijaiuv. (1) 


And I say to 
thee, that thou art 

± CLCl , dlJU. UIJU11 LUio 

Rock will I build 
my " church." 


Instead of church 
they translate "con- 

cy aiiuii . upon 
this Rock will I build 
my " congregation." 
(1) 


It is corrected in 
this last translation. 


St. Matth. 
chap, xviii. 
verse 17. 


Quod si non au- 
dierit eos, die " Ec- 
clesi<e," ixxlrjola- si 
autem " ecclesiam," 

£ w v] »-> n I r* f MAW nilfiiP— 

rit, sit tibi sicut eth- 
nicus et publicanus. 


And if he will 
not hear them, tell 
the " church ;" and 
if he will not hear 

trio K r*niir*r*ri lor 

i iii cxiurcxi, let 
him be as an hea- 
then, and as a pub- 
lican. 


If he will not hear 
them, tell the " con- 
gregation ;" and if 
he will not hear the 

cougregdiioi,, <x/C 


Corrected. 


Ephesians 
chap. v. 
verses 23, 
24, 25, 27, 
29, 32. 


Viri, diligitc uxores 
vestras, sicut et 
Christus dilexit " ec- 
clesiam." 

Ut exhiberet ipsi 
sibi gloriosam " ec- 
clesiam." 

" Sacramentum " 
hoc est magnum ; 
ego autem dico in 
Christo et "ecclesia" 
ittxkrjolav. 


Husbands, love 
your wives, as Christ 
loved the " church," 
verse 25. 

That he might 
present to himself a 
glorious " church," 
verse 27. 

For this is a 
great " sacrament ;" 
but I speak in Christ, 
and in the "church," 
ver. 32, &c. 


Husbands, love 
your wives, as Christ 
loved the " congre- 
gation." 

That he might 
present to himself 
a glorious " congre- 
gation." 

For this is a great 
"secret," for I speak 
in Christ, and in the 
" congregation." 


Corrected. 
Corrected. 
Corrected. 


Hebrews 
chap. ii. 
verse 23. 


Et ecclesiam pri- 
mitivorum, ixxXrjola. 


And the " church" 
of the first-born. 


And the " con- 
gregation" of the 
first-born. 


Corrected. 


Canticles 
chap. vi. 
verse 8. 


Una est columba 
mea. rmjc fila. (2) 


My dove is " one." 


My dove is "alone." 
(2) 


My dove is " but 
one." 


Ephesians 
chap. i. 
verses 22, 
23. 


Et ipsum dedit 
caput supra omnem 
" ecclesiam" qua est 
corpus ipsius, et 
plenitudo ejus, qui 
omnia in omnibus 
" adimplelur, " to 
nlriqunha. (3) 


And hath made 
him head over all 
the "church," which 
is his body, the ful- 
ness of him " which 
is filled," all in all. 


And gave him to 
be the head over all 
things to the " con- 
gregation," which is 
his body, the fulness 
of him " thatfilleth" 
all in all. (3) 


And gave him to 
be the head over 
all things to the 
" church," which is 
his body, the fulness 
of him " that filleth" 
all in all. 



THE C 

The two English Bibles, (a) usually read in 
the Protestant congregations at their first rising 
up, left out the word Catholic in the title of 
those epistles which have been known by the 
name of Catholica Epistolm, ever since the 
apostles' time : (b) and their latter translations, 
dealing somewhat more honestly, have turned 
the word Catholic into " General," " the General 
Epistle of James, of Peter," &c. as if we should 
say in our creed, "we believe the general church." 
So that by this rule, when St. Augustine says, 
that the manner was in cities, where there was 
liberty of religion, to ask, qua itur ad Catkolicum ? 
we must translate it, which is the way to the 
general? And when St. Hierom says, if we agree 
in faith with the bishop of Rome, ergo Calholici 
sumus ; we must translate, " then we are gene- 
rals." Is not this good stuff ? 



(1) And as they suppress the name Catholic, 
even so did they, in their first English Bible, 
the name of church itself :(c) because at their 
first revolt and apostacy from that church, 
which was universally known to be the only true 
Catholic Church, it was a great objection 
against their schismatical proceedings, and 
stuck so much in the people's consciences, that 
they left and forsook the church, and the church 
condemned them : to obviate which, in the 
English translation of 1562, they so totally sup- 
pressed the word church, that it is not once to 
be found in all that Bible, so long read in their 
congregations : because, knowing themselves not 
to be the church, they were resolved not to 
leave God Almighty any church at all, where 
they could possibly root it out, viz., in the Bible. 
And it is probable, if it had been as easy for 
them to have eradicated the church from the 
earth, as it was to blot the word out of their 
Bible, they would have prevented its "continuing 
to the end of the world." 



Another cause for their suppressing the name 
church was, " that it should never sound in the 
common people's ears out of the scriptures," and 
that it might seem to the ignorant a good argu- 
ment against the authority of the church, to say, 
" we find not this word church in all the Bible :" 
as in other articles, where they find not the 
express words in the scripture. 



Our blessed Saviour says : " Upon this rock I 
will build my church ;" but they make him say, 
" Upon this rock I will build my congregation." 
They make the Apostle St. Paul say to Timothy, 
1 Ep. c. iii. " The house of God, which is the 
congregation," not " the church of the living 
God, the pillar and ground of truth." Thus 
they thrust out God's glorious, unspotted, and 



(a) Bib. 1562, 1677. 

(b) Euseb., Hist. Eccles., lib. 2, c. 23, in fine. 

(c) Bible, printed anno 1562. 



hurch. 41 

most beautiful spouse, the church ; and in place 
of it, intrude their own little, wrinkled, and 
spotted congregation. So they boldly make the 
apostle say : " He hath made him head of the con- 
gregation, which is the body :" and in another 
place, " The congregation of the first-born :" 
where the apostle mentions heavenly Jerusalem, 
the city of the living God, &c; so that by this 
translation there is no longer any church mili- 
tant and triumphant, but only congregation ; in 
which they contradict St. Augustine, who 
affirms, that " though the Jewish congregation 
was sometimes called a church, yet the apostles 
never called the church a congregation." But 
their last translation having restored the word 
church, I shall say no more of it in this place. 



(2) Again, the true church is known by unity, 
which mark is given her by Christ himself; in 
whose person Solomon speaking, says : "Una est 
columba mea ;" that is, " one is my dove," or 
" my dove is one." Instead of this, they, being 
themselves full of sects and divisions, will have 
it, " my dove is alone ;" though neither the He- 
brew nor Greek word hath that signification ; 
but, on the contrary, as properly signifies one, as 
unus doth in Latin. But this is also amended 
in their last translation. 



(3) Nor was it enough for them to corrupt the 
scripture against the church's unity ; for there 
was a time when their congregation was invisi- 
ble ; that is to say, when " they were not at all :" 
and therefore, because they will have it, that 
Christ may be without his church, to wit, a head 
without a body, (d) they falsify this place in the 
Epistle to the Eph., xi. 21, 23, translating, 
" he gave him to be the head over all things to 
the church," congregation with them, " which 
(church) is his body, the fulness of him that 
filleth all in all." Here they translate actively 
the Greek word xS nXTiQu/uevv, when, according to 
St. Chrysostom, and all the Greek and Latin 
doctors' interpretation, it ought to be translated 
passively ; so that instead of saying, " and filleth 
all in all," they should say, " the fulness of him 
which is filled all in all ;" all faithful men as 
members, and the whole church as the body 
concurring to the fulness of Christ the head. 
But thus they will not translate, " because," says 
Beza, " Christ needs no such compliment." And 
if he need it not, then he may be without a 
church ; and consequently, it is no absurdity, if 
the church has been for many years not only 
invisible, but also, " not at all." Would a man 
easily imagine that such secret poison could lurk 
in their translations ? Thus they deal with the 
church ; let us now see how they use particular 
points of doctrine. 

(d) Protestants will have Christ to be a head without 
a body, during all that time that their congregation was 
invisible, viz., about 1500 years. 



;2 



II. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683. 


St. Matth. 
chap. xxvi. 
verse 26. 


Accepit Jesus pa- 
rtem et " benedixit" 
xai ivf.oyi\aag, acjre- 
git, dedilque, $c. (1) 


Jesus took bread 
and " blessed," and 
brake, and gave to 
his disciples. 


Instead of " bless- 
ed," they translate, 

and when he had 
given thanks." (1) 


Corrected. 


St. Mark, 
chap. xiv. 
verse 22. 


Accepit Jesus pa- 
nem et "benedicens," 
xai ivloyi l iau;,<Scc.(2) 


Jesus took bread, 
and "blessing," &c. 


Instead of " bless- 
ing," they say, "and 
when he had given 
thanks." (2) 


Corrected. 


Acts of 
ihe Apos. 
chap. iii. 
verse 21. 


Quern uportet qui- 
dem caelum " susci- 
pere" usque in tem- 
pora restitutioms 
omnium, ov oei 
vov U\aodai. (3) 


Whom heaven tru- 
ly must " receive," 
until the times of 
the restitution of all 
things. 


Instead of "receive," 
they say, whom hea- 
ven must " contain." 
And Beza, " who 
must be contained 
in heaven." (3) 


Corrected. 


Jeremiah 
chap. xi. 
verse 19. 


Mittatnus lignum 
in panem ejus. (4) 


Let us cast wood 
upon his bread. 


" We will destroy 
his meat with wood." 
In another Bible, 
" Let us destroy the 
tree with the fruit." 
(4) 


Let us destroy the 
tree with the fruit 
thereof. 


Genesis 
chap. xiv. 
verse 18. 


At veto Melchize- 
dek, sex Salem, pro- 
ferens panem et vi- 
num, " erat enim 
sacerdos Dei Altis- 
simi." (5) 


And Melchizedek, 
king of Salem, 
brought forth bread 
and wine ; " for he 
was the priest of 
God most high." 


Instead of " for 
he was the priest," 
they translate, " and 
he was the priest," 
&c. (5) 


Instead of "for," 
they translate "and." 



"THE BLESSED SACRAMENT AND SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. 



43 



(1) The turning of blessings into bare thanks- 
giving, was one of the first steps of our pre- 
tended reformers, towards denying the real pre- 
sence. By endeavouring to take away the operation 
and efficacy of Christ's blessing, pronounced upon 
the bread and wine, they would make it no more 
than a thanksgiving to God : and that, not only 
in translating thanksgiving for blessing, but also 
in urging the word eucharist, to prove it a mere 
thanksgiving ; though we find the verb ev/aQigeiv 
used also transitively by the Greek fathers, 
saying, top aqzov IvxaQiqridsvTu, panem, et chali- 
cem eucharistisatos ; or, panem, in quo gratiae actas 
sunt ; that is, " the bread and cup made the 
eucharist ;" " the bread, over which thanks are 
given ;" that is, " which, by the word of prayer 
and thanksgiving is made a consecrated meat, 
the flesh and blood of Christ." (a) St. Paul 
also, speaking of this sacrament, calls it. (1 Cor. 
x.)"the chalice of benediction, which we do 
bless ;'.' which St. Cyprian thus explicates, " the 
chalice consecrated by solemn blessing." St. 
Basil and St. Chrysostom, in their liturgies, say 
thus, " Bless, O Lord, the sacred bread ;" and 
"bless, Lord, the sacred cup, changing it by 
thy Holy Spirit :" where are signified the conse- 
cration and transmutation thereof into the body 
and blood of Christ. 



(2) And, by this corrupt translation, they 
would have Christ so included in heaven, that 
he cannot be with us upon the altar. But Beza 
confesses, " that he translates it thus, on pur- 
pose to keep Christ's presence from the altar ;" 
which is so far from the Greek, that not only Illy- 
ricus, but even Calvin himself, dislikes it. And 
you may easily judge, how contrary to St. Chry- 
sostom it is, who tells us, " that Christ ascending 
into heaven, both left us his flesh, and yet ascend- 
ing hath the same." And again, " miracle !" 
says he, " he that sits above with the Father in the 
same moment of time is handled with the hands 
of all." (b) This, you see, is the faith and 
doctrine of the ancient fathers ; and it is the 
faith of the Catholic Church at this day. Who 
sees not, that this faith, thus to believe the pre- 
sence of Christ is in both places at once, because 
he is omnipotent, is far greater than the Pro- 
testant faith, which believes no farther than that 
he is ascended ; and that therefore he cannot 
be present upon the altar, nor dispose of his 
body as he pleases 1 If we should ask them, 
whether he was also in heaven, when he appeared 
to Saul going to Damascus ; or whether he can 
be both in heaven, and with his church on earth, 
to the end of the world, as he promised ; per- 
haps, by this doctrine of theirs, they would be 
put to a stand. (3) 

Consider further, how plain our Saviour's 
words, " this is my body," are for the real pre- 



(a) St. Justin in fine, 2 Apolog., St. Irenseus, lib. 4, 34. 

(b) Horn. 2, ad popul. Antioch., lib, 3, de Sacerdotio. 



sence of his body : and for the real presence of 
his blood in the chalice, what can be more 
plainly spoken, than " this is the chalice, the 
New Testament in my blood, which chalice is 
shed for you." (c) According to the Greek, to 
noTtjQtov to ex/vvojuevov, the word "which" must 
needs be referred to the chalice : in which 
speech chalice cannot otherwise be taken, than 
for that in the chalice ; which sure, must needs 
be the blood of Christ, and not wine, because his 
blood only was shed for us ; according to St. 
Chrysostom, who says : " That which is in the 
chalice is the same which gushed out of his 
side." (d) And this deduction so troubled Beza, 
that he exclaims against all the Greek copies in 
the world, as corrupted in this place. 



(4) " Let us cast wood upon his bread ;" 
" that is," saith St. Hierom, (e) " the cross upon 
the body of our Saviour ; for it is he that said, 
I am the bread that descended from heaven." 
Where the prophet so long before, saying bread, 
and meaning his body, alludes prophetically to 
his body in the blessed sacrament, made of 
bread, and under the form of bread ; and there- 
fore also called bread by the apostle, (1 Cor. x.) 
so that both in the prophet and the apostle, his 
bread and his body is all one. And lest we 
should think the bread only signifies his body, 
he says, " Let us put the cross upon his bread ;" 
that is, upon his very natural body that hung on 
the cross. It is evident, that the Hebrew verb 
is not now the same with that which the seventy 
interpreters translated into Greek, and St 
Hierom into Latin ; but altered, as may be sup- 
posed, by the Jews, to obscure this prophecy of 
their crucifying Christ upon the cross. And 
though Protestants will needs take the advan- 
tage of this corruption, yet so little does the 
Hebrew word, that now is, agree with the words 
following, that they cannot so translate it, as to 
make any commodious sense or understanding 
of it ; as appears by their different translations, 
and their transposing their words in English, 
otherwise than they are in the Hebrew. ( /) 



(5) If Protestants should grant Melchize- 
dek's typical sacrifice of bread and wine, then 
would follow also, a sacrifice of the New Tes- 
tament ; which, to avoid, they purposely translate 
" and" in this place ; when, in other places, the 
same Hebrew particle vau, they translate enim, 
for ; not being ignorant, that it is in those, as in 
this place, better expressed by " for" or " because, " 
than by " and." See the exposition of the fathers 
upon it. (g) 



(c) Luke xxii. v. 20. 

(d) St. Chrysost. in 1 Cor., cap. x., Horn. 24. 

(e) St. Hierom. in com. in cap. xi. vers. 19, Hierom. 
Prophetas. 

(/) Genes, xx. 3 ; Gen. xxs- 27 ; Isaiah lxiv. 5. 
( g) St. Cypr., Epist. 63, Epiphan. Hser. 55 et 79. St. 
Hierom. in Matth. xxvi-, et in Epist. ad Evagrium. 



44 



III. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683. 


T^rovprVts 

3. 1 KJ V \-< k kJ *J 

chap. ix. 
verse 5. 


Venite comedite pa- 
nem meurn, et bibite 
vinum quod "miscui" 
vobis, xsxegaxa, "Da, 

(1) 


Come, eat my 
bread, and drink 
the wine which I 
have " mingled" for 
you. 


The corruption is, 
drink the winewhich 
I have " drawn ;" 
instead of " min- 
gled." (1) 


Come, eat of my 
bread, and drink of 
the wine which I 
have " mingled." 


Proverbs 
chap. ix. 
verse 1. 


Immolavit victimas 
suas, miscuit vinum, 
sxeqaasv. (2) 


She hath immola- 
ted her hosts, she 
hath " mingled" her 
wine. 


She hath "drawn" 
her wine. (2) 


She hath killed 
her beasts, she hath 
mingled her wine. 


1 Corinth. 


Itaque quicunque 
manducaverit panem 
hunc, vel, rj, biberit 
calicem domini in- 
digne, S(C. (3) 


Therefore, whoso- 
ever shall eat this 
bread, " or" drink 
the chalice of our 
Lord unworthily, 
&c. 




Wherefore, who- 
soever shall eat this 
bread, " and" drink 
this cup of the Lord 
unworthily, &c. 


chap. xi. 
verse 27. 




1 Corinth, 
chap. ix. 
verse 13. 


Et qui altari de- 
serviunt cum altari 
participant, duoiac;r]- 
qiov, nam. (4) 


And they that serve 
the " altar," partici- 
pate with the"altar." 


Instead of " al- 
tar," they translate 
" temple." (4) 


Corrected. 


1 Corinth, 
chap. x. 
verse 18. 


Nonne qui edunt 
hostias participes, 
sunt altaris ? 6uai- 

UZTjQlti. (5) 


Those that eat the 
hosts, are they not 
partakers of the 
" altar ?" 


Partakers of the 
" temple. (5) 


Corrected. 


Daniel 
chap. xiv. 
verse 12. 


Quia fecer ant sub- 
mensa absconditum 
introitum, Jgans'Qa. 
(6) 


For they had made 
a privy entrance un- 
der the " table." 


For, " under the 
table," they say, un- 
der the " altar." (6) 


The two last chap- 
ters they call Apo- 
crypha. 


Et ver&e 17 


Intuitus rest men- 


The king behold- 
ing the " table." 


The king behold- 
ing the " altar." 




sam. 




Et etiam 


Et consumebant 


And they did con- 
sume the things 
which were upon 
the " table." 


Which was upon 
tne altar. 




verse 20. 


qucs erant super men- 
sam. 





THE BLESSED SACRAMENT AND THE ALTAR. 



45 



(1,2) These prophetical words of Solomon 
are of great importance, as being a manifest 
prophecy of Christ's mingling water and wine 
in the chalice at his last supper ; which at this 
day, the Catholic Church observes : but Pro- 
testants, counting it an idle ceremony, frame 
their translation accordingly ; suppressing alto- 
gether this mixture or mingling, contrary to the 
true interpretation both of the Greek and He- 
brew ; as also, contrary to the ancient fathers' 
exposition of this place. " The Holy Ghost 
(says St. Cyprian) by Solomon, foreshoweth a 
type of our Lord's sacrifice, of the immolated 
host of bread and wine ; saying, Wisdom hath 
killed her hosts, she hath mingled her wine into 
the cup ; come ye, eat my bread, and drink the 
wine that I have mingled for you." (a) Speak- 
ing of wine mingled (saith this holy doctor) he 
foreshoweth prophetically, the cup of our Lord j 
mingled with water and wine, (b) St. Justin, 
from the same Greek word, calls it, xga^a ; that | 
is, (according to Plutarch) wine mingled with 
water : so likewise does St. Irenaeus- (c) See 
also the sixth general council, (d) treating largely 
hereof, and deducing it from the apostles and 
ancient fathers ; and interpreting this Greek 
word by another equivalent, and more plainly 
signifying this mixture, v'u,., fiiyvuvut. 

(3) In this place, they very falsely translate 
" and," instead of " or," contrary both to the 
Greek and Latin. And this they do on purpose, 
to infer a necessity of communicating under both 
kinds, as the conjunctive " and" may seem to do : 
whereas, by the disjunctive "or" it is evident, that 
we may communicate in one kind only ; as was, 
in divers cases, the practice of the primitive 
church ; as also of the apostles themselves. 
(Act. ii. 42, and xx. 7.) 

But the practice of our Saviour is the best 
witness of his doctrine : who, sitting at the table 
at Emaus (e) with two of his disciples, " took 
bread, and blessed, and brake it, and did reach j 
to them." By which St. Augustine and (f) the 
other fathers, understand the eucharist : where 
no mention is made of wine, or the chalice : but 
the reaching of the bread, their knowing him, 
and his vanishing away, so joined, that not any 
time is left for the benediction and consecration 
of the chalice. 

In the primitive times, " it was the custom to 
administer the blood only to children," as St. 
Cyprian tells us : and, both he and Tertullian 
say, " that it was their practice, most commonly, 
to reserve the body of Christ ;" which, as Euse- 
bius witnesses, " they were wont to give alone 

(a) Ep. 63, 2. 

b) Apol. 2, in fine. 

c) St. Irenaeus, lib. 5, prop. Init. 

(d) Concil. Constantinop., 6, Can. 32, 

(e) Luke xxiv. 30; Lib. 3, de Consensu. 

(/) Hier. Epitaph. Paula;. Beda. Theophylact. St. Cy- 
prian. 1. de lapsis, n. 10 ; Tertul , 1. 2, ad Ux., n. 4 ; 
Euseb. Eccl. Hist, 1. 6 c. 36; St. Basil, Ep. ad Csesa- 
riam Patritiam. 

6 



to sick people, for their viaticum." Also, "the 
holy hermits in the wilderness, commonly re- 
ceived and reserved the blessed body alone, and 
not the blood," as St. Basil tells us. 

For whole Christ is really present, under 
either kind, as Protestants themselves have 
confessed : read their words in Hospinian, (g) 
a Protestant, who affirms, " that they believed 
and confessed whole Christ to be really present, 
exhibited and received under either kind ; and 
therefore under the only form of bread : neither 
did they judge those to do evil, who communi- 
cated under one kind." And Luther, as alleged 
by Hospinian, (k) says, " that it is not needful to 
give both kinds ; but as one alone sufficeth, the 
church has power of ordaining only one, and 
the people ought to be content therewith, if it 
be ordained by the church." Whence it is 
granted, that, " it is lawful for the Church of God. 
upon just occasions, absolutely to determine or 
limit the use thereof." 



(4, 5) To translate temple instead of altar, 
is so gross a corruption, that had it not been 
done thrice immediately within two chapters, 
one would have thought it had been done through 
oversight, and not on purpose. The name of 
altar both in Hebrew and Greek, and by the 
custom of all people, both Jews and Pagans, 
implies and imports a sacrifice. We therefore, 
with respect to the sacrifice of Christ's body and 
blood, say altar, rather than table, as all the an- 
cient fathers were accustomed to speak and 
write ; though, with respect to eating and 
drinking Christ's body and blood, it is also 
called a table. But because Protestants will 
have only a communion of bread and wine, or a 
supper, and no sacrifice ; therefore, they call it 
table only, and abhor the word altar, as papis- 
tical ; especially in the first translation of 1562, 
which was made when they were throwing down 
altars throughout England. 

(6) Where the name altar should be, they 
suppress it ; and here, where it should not be, 
they put it in their translations ; and that thrice 
in one chapter ; and that either on purpose to 
dishonour Catholic altars, or else to save the 
credit of their communion table ; as fearing, lest 
the name of Bell's table might redound to the 
dishonour of their communion table. Wherein 
it is to be wondered, how they could imagine 
it any disgrace either for table or altar, if the 
idols also had their tables and altars ; whereas 
St. Paul so plainly names both together : " The 
table of our Lord, and the table of devils, (i) 
If the table of devils, why not the table of Bell ? 
By this we see, how light a thing it was with 
them to corrupt the scriptures in those days. 

(g) Hospin. Hist. Sacram , p. 2, fol. 112. 

(h) lb., fol. 12. 

(i) 1. Cor. x. 21. 



46 



IV. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
a. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683, 


Acts of 
the Apos. 
chap. xv. 
verse 2. 


Statuerunt lit as- 
cenderent Paulas et 
Barnabas, el quidam 
alii ex aliis ad Apos- 
tolos et "presbyteros" 
TtQso^vtB Que ytn Jeru- 
salem, <Sfc. 


They appointed that 
Paul and Barnabas 
should go up, and 
certain others of the 
rest, to the apostles 
and " priests" unto 
Jerusalem. 


Instead of "priests," 
they translate " el- 
ders." 


For "priests" they 
say here also " el- 
ders." 


Titus, 
chap. i. 
verse 5. 


Hujus rei gratia 
reliqui te Crete, tit 
ea qua desunt corri- 
gas, et constituas per 
civitales " presbyte- 

" CJ/M// /'/ 0(TI\ i\ I <? 

1 I/O . o t( Hi W tltO" 

posui tibi. 


For this cause 
left I thee in Crete, 
that thou shouldest 
reform the things 
that are wanting, 

irwl slioiildc j st nrnaTTl 

" priests," by cities, 
as I also appointed 
thee. 


Instead of "priests," 
they translate " el- 
ders." 


For "priests" they 
say " elders." 


1 Timoth. 
chap. v. 

fforco 1 "7 
VcTotJ J ' 


Qui bene prcesunt 
" presbyteri," duplici 

nrtn/\v/> siiitiii nnhioriYt^ 
llUllUi o Uvt'llt ItUUtLlll" 

tur. 


The " priests" that 
rule well, let them 

pfttppmAn wnvtnv 

of double honour. 


The " elders" that 
rule well, &c. 


" Elders" also in 
this Bible. 


1 Timoth. 
chap. v. 
verse 19. 


Adversus " pres- 
byterutn" accusatio- 
nem noli recipere,<S(C. 


Against a "priest" 
receive not accusa- 
tion, &c. 


Against an "elder" 
receive not accusa- 
tion, &c. 


Instead of "priest' 
they put " elder." 


St. James, 
chap. v. 
verse 14. 


Infirmatur quis in 
vobis? inducal "pres- 
byteros ecclesiee" et 
orent super eum. 


Is any man sick 
among you ? let him 
bring in the" priests" 
of the church, and 
let them pray over 
him. 


Let him 

bring in the "elders" 
of the " congrega- 
tion, &c. 


Elders for "priests" 
here also. 



PRIESTS AND 

St. Augustine affirms, " That in the divine 
scripture several sacrifices are mentioned, some 
before the manifestation of the New Testament, 
&c, and another now, which is agreeable to this 
manifestation, &c, and which is demonstrated 
not only from the evangelical, but also from the 
prophetical writings." (a) A truth most certain ; 
our sacrifice of the New Testament being most 
clearly proved from the sacrifice of Melchizedek 
in the Old Testament ; of whom, and whose 
sacrifice, it is said, " But Melchizedek, king of 
Salem, brought forth bread and wine ; for he 
was the priest of God most high, and he blessed 
him," &c. And to make the figure agree to the 
thing figured, and the truth to answer the figure 
of Christ, it is said, " Our Lord hath sworn, and 
it shall not repent him ; thou art a priest for 
ever, according to the order of Melchizedek." In 
the New Testament, Jesus is made an " high 
priest, according to the order of Melchizedek." 
For according to the similitude of Melchizedek, 
there arises another priest, who continues for 
ever, and has an everlasting priesthood. Whence 
it is clearly proved, that Melchizedek was a 
priest, and offered bread and wine as a sacrifice ; 
therein prefiguring Christ our Saviour, and his 
sacrifice daily offered in the church, under the 
forms of bread and wine, by an everlasting 
priesthood. 



But the English Protestants, on purpose to 
abolish the holy sacrifice of the mass, did not 
only take away the word altar out of the scrip- 
ture ; but they also suppressed the name priest, 
in all their translations, turning it into elder; (b) 
well knowing that these three, priest, sacri- 
fice, and altar, are dependents and consequents 
one of another ; so that they cannot be separ- 
ated. If there be an external sacrifice, there 
must be an extenal priesthood to offer it, 
and an altar to offer the same upon. So 
Christ himself being a priest, according to 
the order of Melchizedek, had a sacrifice, " his 
body ;" and an altar, " his cross," on which he 
offered it. And because he instituted this sacri- 
fice, to continue in his church for ever, in com- 
memoration and representation of his death, 
therefore, did he ordain his apostles priests, at 
his last supper ; where and when he instituted 
the holy order of priesthood or priests, (saying, 
hoc facite, " do this,") to offer the sell-same 
sacrifice in a mystical and unbloody manner, 
until the world's end. 



But our new pretended reformers have made 
the scriptures quite dumb, as to the name of any 
such priest or priesthood as we now speak of ; 
never so much as once naming priest, unless 

(a) St. August., Ep. 49, q. 3. 

(b\ Psal. ex. 4; Heb. vi. 20, and chap. vii. 15, 17, 24. 



PRIESTHOOD. 47 

when mention is made either of the priests of the 
Jews, or the priests of the Gentiles, especially 
when such are reprehended or blamed in the 
holy scripture ; and in such places they are sure 
to name priests in their translations, on purpose 
to make the very name of priests odious among 
the common ignorant people. Again, they have 
also the name priests, when they are taken for 
all manner of men, women, or children, that 
offer internal and spiritual sacrifices ; whereby 
they would falsely signify, that there are no other 
priests in the law of grace. As Whitaker, (c) 
one of their great champions, freely avouches, 
directly contrary to St. Augustine, who, in one 
brief sentence, distinguishes priests, properly so 
called in the church ; and priests, as it is a 
common name to all Christians. This name 
then of priest and priesthood, properly so called, 
as St. Augustine says, they wholly suppress ; 
never translating the word Presbyteros " priests," 
but " elders ;" and that with so full and general 
consent in all their English Bibles, that, as the 
Puritans plainly confess, and Mr. Whitgift de- 
nies it not, a man would wonder to see how 
careful they are, that the people may not once 
hear of the name of any such priest in all the 
holy scriptures : and even in their latter trans- 
lations, though they are ashamed of the word 
" eldership," yet they have not the power to put 
the English word priesthood, as they ought to 
do, in the text, that the vulgar may understand 
it, but rather the Greek word presbytery : such 
are the poor shifts they are glad to make use 
of. 



So blinded were these innovators with heresy, 
that they could not see how the holy scriptures, 
the fathers, and ecclesiastical custom, have 
drawn several words from their profane and 
common signification, to a more peculiar and 
ecclesiastical one ; as Episcopus, which in Tully 
is an " overseer," is a bishop in the New Testa- 
ment ; so the Greek word, %siqoiovsiv, signifying 
" ordain," they translate as profanely, as if they 
were translating Demosthenes, or the Laws of 
Athens, rather than the holy scriptures ; when, 
as St. Hierom tells them, (d) it signifieth 
Clericorum ordinationem ; that is, " giving of 
holy orders," which is done not only by prayer 
of the voice, but by imposition of the hands," 
according to St. Paul to Timothy, " Impose 
hands suddenly on no man ;" that is, " Be not 
hasty to give holy orders." In like manner 
they translate minister for deacon, ambassador 
for apostle, messenger for angel, &c, leaving, 
I say, the ecclesiastical use of the word for the 
original signification. 



(«) Whitaker, p. 199; St. Aug., lib. 20, de Civit. Dei, 
cap. 10. See the Puritan's Reply, p. 159, and Whitgift'a 
Defence against the Puritans, p. 722. 

(d) St. Hierom. in cap. lviii. Esai. 



48 



V. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683, 


Acts of 
the Apos. 
chap. xiv. 
verse 22. 


Et cum constilu- 
issenl, xeiqojov^auv. 
reg, ill is per sin- 
gulas " ecchsias" 
"presbvteros," -noea- 

{iuTfiQH;. ( 1 ) 


And when they had 
ordained to them 
" priests" in every 
" church." 


And when they 
had ordained " el- 
ders by election," in 
every " congrega- 
tion." (1) 


"Elders" set in the 
stead of " priests." 


1 Timoth. 

chap. iv. 
verse 14. 


Noli ncgligere 
"gratiam," x a Q La l xu - 
roa, qua in te est, 
qum data est tibiper 
propheliam cum im- 
positions manuum 
u presbyterii." (2) 


Neglect not the 
" grace" that is in 
thee, which is given 
thee by prophesy, 
with imposition of 
the hands of "priest- 
hood." 


Instead of "grace," 
they translate "gift;" 
and " eldership" in- 
stead of " priest- 
hood." (2) 


For the word 
" grace" they say 
" gift ;" and " pres- 
bytery," the Greek 
word, rather than 
the English word, 
" priesthood." 


2 Timoth. 
chap. i. 
verse 6. 


Propter quam cau- 
sam admoneo te, ut 
resuscites "gratiam" 
Dei, qum in te est 
per tmpositionem 
manuum mearum. 


For the which 
cause I admonish 
thee,that thou resus- 
citate the " grace" 
of God, which is in 
thee, by the imposi- 
tion of my hands. 


Instead of the 
word " grace" they 
say " gift." 


They translate 
" gift," in the stead 
of " grace." 


1 Timoth. 
ehap. iii. 
verse 8. 


" Diaconos" si- 
militer " pudicos," 
non bilingues, <fyc., 
diaxovog. (3) 


"Deacons" in like 
manner " chaste," 
not double-tongued, 
&c. 


" Ministers" for 
" deacons." (3) 


Likewise must 
the " deacons" be 
" grave." 


Et verse 12. 


diaxofoi, diaeoni.(4) 


Deacons. 


Deacons. (4) 


Deacons. 



PRIESTHOOD AN 

(1) We have heard, in old time, of making 
priests ; and, of late days, of making ministers ; 
but who has ever heard in England of making 
elders by election ? yet, in their first translations, 
it continued a phrase of scripture till King 
James the First's time ; and then they thought 
good to blot out the words by " election," begin- 
ning to consider, that such elders as were made 
only by election, without consecration, could not 
pretend to much more power of administering 
the sacraments, than a churchwarden, or con- 
stable of the parish ; for, if they denied ordina- 
tion to be a sacrament, (a) and consequently, 
to give grace, and impress a character, doubtless 
they could not attribute much to a bare elec- 
tion : and yet, in those days, when this transla- 
tion was made, their doctrine was, " that in the 
New Testament, election, without consecration, 
was sufficient to make a priest or bishop." Wit- 
ness Cranmer himself, who being asked, whether 
in the New Testament there is required any 
consecration of a bishop or priest ? answered thus 
under his hand, viz., " In the New Testament, 
he that is appointed to be a priest or bishop, 
needeth no consecration by the scripture ; for 
election thereunto is sufficient ; (b) and Dr. 
Slillingfleet informs us, that Cranmer has de- 
clared, " that a governor could make priests, as 
well as bishops." And Mr. Whitaker tells us, 
" that there are no priests now in the Church of 
Christ ;" page 200, advers. Camp, that is, as he 
interprets himself, page 210, " this name priest 
is never in the New Testament peculiarly ap- 
plied to the ministers of the Gospel." And we 
are not ignorant, how both King Edward the 
Sixth, and Queen Elizabeth, made bishops by 
their letters patent only, let our Lambeth re- 
cords pretend what they will : to authorize which, 
it is no wonder, if they made the scripture say, 
" when they had ordained elders by election," 
instead of " priests by imposition of hands ;" 
though contrary to the fourth Council of Car- 
thage, which enjoins, " that when a priest takes 
his orders, the bishop blessing him, and holding 
his hand upon his head, all the priests also that 
are present, hold their hands by the bishop's 
hand, upon his head, (c) So are our priests 
made at this day ; and so would now the clergy 
of the Church of England pretend to be made, 
if they had but bishops and priests able to make 
them. For which purpose, they have not only 
corrected this error in their last translations, 
but have also gotten the words, bishop and priest, 
thrust into their forms of ordination : but the 
man that wants hands to work with, is not much 
oetter for having tools. 



(2) Moreover, some of our pretenders to 
priesthood, would gladly have holy order to take 

(a) Twenty-fifth of the Thirty-nine Articles. 

(b) See Dr. Burnet's Hist, of the Refor.; see Stilling- 
fleet Irenicon, p. 392. 

(c) Council 3, anno 436, where St. Augustine was 
present, and subscribed. 



D HOLY ORDERS. 49 

its place again among the sacraments : and 
therefore both Dr. Bramhall and Mr. Mason 
reckon it for a sacrament, though quite contrary 
to their scripture translators, (d) who, lest it 
should be so accounted, do translate " gift" in- 
stead of " grace ;" lest it should appear, that 
grace is given in holy orders. I wonder they 
have not corrected this in their latter transla- 
tions : but, perhaps, they durst not do it, for 
fear of making it clash with the 25th of their 
39 Articles. It is no less to be admired, that 
since they began to be enamoured of priesthood, 
they have not displaced that profane intruder, 
" elder," and placed the true ecclesiastical word 
" priest," in the text. But to this I hear them 
object, that our Latin translation hath Seniores 
et majores natu ; and therefore, . why may not 
they also translate " elders ?" To which I an- 
swer, " that this is nothing to them, who profess 
to translate the Greek, and not our Latin ; and 
the Greek word they know is nQeofiviiQaa presby- 
teros. Again, I say, that if they meant no worse 
than the old Latin translator did, they would be 
as indifferent as he, to have said sometimes 
priest and priesthood, when he has the words, 
" presbyteros" and " presbyterium," as we are 
indifferent in our translation, saying, seniors and 
ancient, when we find it so in Latin : being well 
assured, that by sundry words he meant but one 
thing, as in Greek it is but one. St. Hierom 
reads, Presbyteros ego cornpresbyter, (e) in 1 ad 
Gal., proving the dignity of priests : and yet 
in the 4th of the Galatians, he reads according 
to the Vulgate Latin text : Seniores in vobis rogo 
consenior et ipse : whereby it is evident, that 
senior here, and in the Acts, is a priest ; and not, 
on the contrary, presbyter, an elder. 



(3) In this place they thrust the word minis- 
ter into the text, for an ecclesiastical order : so 
that, though they will not have bishops, priests, 
and deacons, yet they would gladly have bishops, 
ministers, and deacons ; yet the word they 
translate for minister, is diaxdvoa, diaconus ; the 
very same that, a little after, they translate 
deacon, (e) And so because bishops went 
before in the same chapter, they have found 
out three orders, bishops, ministers, and deacons. 
How poor a shift is this, that they are forced to 
make the apostles speak three things for two, on 
purpose to get a place in the scripture for their 
ministers ! As likewise, in another place, (/) 
on purpose to make room for their ministers' 
wives, for there is no living without them, they 
translate wife instead of woman, making St. 
Paul say : " Have not we power to lead about a 
wife ?" &c, for which cause they had rather say 
grave than chaste. 



(d) Dr. Bramh. p. 96 ; Mason, lib. 1. 
(c) St. Hier., Ep. 85, ad Evagr. 
(/) 1 Cor. ix. 5. 



50 VI. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683. 


Malachi 
chap. ii. 
verse 7. 


Labia enim sacer- 
dotis custodient sci- 
entiam, et legem re- 
quirent ex ore ejus : 
quia " angclus" Do- 
mini exercituum est. 
(1) 


The priest's lips 
" shall" keep know- 
ledge, and they 
" shall" seek the 
law at his mouth ; 
because he is the 
" angel" of the 
Lord of hosts. 


The priest's lips 
" should keep 
knowledge,and they 
" should" seek the 
law at his mouth j 
because he is the 
" messenger" of the 
Lord of hosts. (1 ) 


For " shall" they 
translate " should." 
And for " angel" 
"messenger," in this 

3.1 SO • 


Apocalyp. 
chap. ii. iii. 
verses 1 , 8, 
12. 


" Angelo" Ephesi 
ecclesitB scribe. 


To the "angel" 
of the church of 
Ephesus, write thou. 


To the " messen- 
ger" of, <fcc, instead 
of " angel-" 


Corrected. 


Malachi 
chap. iii. 
verse 1 . 


Ecce, ego mitto 
"angelum" meumjov 
ayyelov py, et pra>- 
parabit viam ante 
faciem mcam. Et 
slatim veniel ad tem- 
plum suum Domina- 
tor, quern vos qu&ri- 
tis, ct " Angelus" 
testamenti, quern 
vos vultis. (2) 


Behold, I send 
mine " angel," and 
he shall prepare the 
way before my face. 
And the Ruler 
whom ye seek, shall 
suddenly come to 
his temple, even the 
" Angel" of the 
testament, whom ye 
wish for. 


" Instead of " an- 
gel," they say "mes- 
senger." And for 
" Angel" of the tes- 
tament, they trans- 
late, " Messenger" 
of the covenant. (2) 


The same also 
they translate here, 
without any correc- 
tion. 


St. Matth. 

<. JIull. All 

verse 10. 


Hie est enim de 
quo scriptum est, 
ecce, ego mitto " an- 
gelum" meum ante 
faciem tuam. 


For this is he of 
whom it is writteD, 
Behold, I send mine 
" angel" before thy 
face. 


For " angel" they 
say " messenger." 


Instead of " an- 
gel," they say "mes- 
senger." 


Luke 
chap. vii. 
verse 27. 


Hie est de quo 
scriptum est, ecce, 
mitto " angelum " 
meum, Sfc. 


This is he of 
whom it is written, 
Behold, I send mine 
" angel," &c. 


— Behold, I send 
my " messenger," 
&c. 


For " angel," 
" messenger." 


2 Corinth. 

Clldp. IX. 

verse 10. 


Si quid donavi 
propter vos in " per- 
sona" Christi,Bv nqo- 
owna) Xqico. (3) 


If I pardoned any 
tiling tor you m me 
" person" of Christ. 


— In the " sight" 
oi v^iirisi. ioi 


Corrected. 



THE AUTHORITY OF PRIESTS. 



51 



(1) Because our pretended reformers teach, 
" That order is not a sacrament ;" " that it 
has neither visible sign," (what is imposition of 
hands ?) " nor ceremony ordained by God ; nor 
form ; nor institution from Christ;" (a) con- 
sequently, that it cannot imprint a character on 
the soul of the person ordained ; they not only 
avoid the word " priests," in their transla- 
tions, but, the more to derogate from the pri- 
vilege and dignity of priests, they make the 
scripture, in this place, speak contrary to the 
words of the prophet ; as they are read both in 
the Hebrew and Greek, <pvl&£sTai £%%7]ij[<T8at.v i 
■rasps 1 ym»* ; where it is as plain as can be spoken, 
that " the priest's lips shall keep knowledge, and 
they shall seek the law at his mouth ;" which is 
a wonderful privilege given to the priests of 
the old law, for true determination in matters 
of controversy, and rightly expounding the law, 
as we may read more fully in Deuteronomy the 
17th chapter, where they are commanded, under 
pain of death, to stand to the priest's judgment : 
which, in this place, verse 4, God, by his pro- 
phet Malachi, calls, " His covenant with Levi," 
and that he will have it stand, to wit, in the 
New Testament, where St. Peter has such pri- 
vilege for him and his successors, that his faith 
shall not fail ; and where the Holy Ghost is 
president in the councils of bishops and priests. 
All which, the reformers of our days would 
deface and defeat, by translating the words 
otherwise than the Holy Ghost has spoken them. 
And when the prophet adds immediately the 
cause of this singular prerogative of the priest : 
" because he is the angel of the Lord of hosts," 
which is also a wonderful dignity to be so called ; 
they translate ; " because he is the messenger of 
the Lord of hosts." So do they also, in the 
Revelations, call the bishops of the seven 
churches of Asia, messengers. 



(2) And here, in like manner, they call St. 
John the Baptist, messenger ; where the scrip- 
ture, no doubt, speaks more honourably of him, 
as being Christ's precursor, than of a messenger, 
which is a term for postboys and lacqueys. The 
scripture, I say, speaks more honourably of 
him ; and our Saviour, in the Gospel, telling 
the people the wonderful dignities of St. John, 
and that he was more than a prophet, cites this 
place, and gives this reason, " For this is he of 
whom it is written, Behold, I send my angel be- 
fore thee :" which St. Hierom calls, meritorum, 
aii^rjaif, the " increase and augmenting of John's 
merits and privileges." (b) And St. Gregory, 
" He who came to bring tidings of Christ him- 
self, was worthily called an angel, that in his 
very name there might be dignity." And all 



(a) Twenty-fifth of the Thirty-nine Articles. Roger's 
Defence of the same, p. 155. 

(b) St. Hierom, in Comment, inhunc locum. St. Greg., 
Horn. 6. in Evang. 



the fathers conceive a great excellency of this 
word angel ; but our Protestants, who measure 
all divine things and persons by the line of their 
human understanding, translate accordingly ; 
making our Saviour say, that " John was more 
than a prophet," because he was a " messenger." 
Yea, where our blessed Saviour himself is called 
Angelas testamenti, the Angel of the testament ; 
there they translate, the " messenger of the 
covenant." 



St. Hierom translated not nuntius, but an- 
gelus ; the church, and all antiquity, both 
reading and expounding it as a term of more 
dignity and excellency. Why do the innovators 
of our age thus boldly disgrace the very elo- 
quence of scripture, which, by such terms of 
amplification, would speak more significantly 
and emphatically 1 Why, I say, do they for 
angel translate messenger ? for apostle, legate 
or ambassador, and the like ? Doubtless, this 
is all done to take away, as much as possible, the 
dignity and excellency of the priesthood. Yet, 
methinks, they should have corrected this' in 
their latter translations, when they began them- 
selves to aspire to the title of priests ; whose 
name, however, they may usurp, yet could not 
hitherto attain to the authority and power of 
the priesthood. They are but priests in name 
only ; the power they want, and therefore are 
pleased to be content with the ordinary style of 
messengers ; not yet daring to term themselves 
angels, as St. John did the bishops of the seven 
churches of Asia. 



(3) But, great is the authority, dignity, excel- 
lency, and power of God's priests and bishops : 
they do bind and loose, and execute all ecclesi- 
astical functions, as in the person and power of 
Christ, whose ministers they are. So St. Paul 
says : " that when he pardoned or released the 
penance of the incestuous Corinthian, he did it 
in the person of Christ ;" (c) they falsely trans- 
late, " in the sight of Christ ;" " that is, as 
St. Ambrose expounds it, " in the name of 
Christ;" " in his stead," and as " his vicar and 
deputy ;" and when he excommunicated the same 
incestuous person, he said, " he did it in the 
name, and by virtue of our Lord Jesus 
Christ." (d) And the fathers of the Council of 
Ephesus avouch, " that no man doubts, yea, it 
is known to all ages, that holy and most blessed 
Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pil- 
lar of faith, and foundation of the Catholic 
Church, received from our Lord Jesus Christ 
the keys of the kingdom ; and that power of 
loosing and binding sins was given him ; who, 
in his successors, lives and exercises judgment 
to this very time, and always." (e) 



(c) 2 Cor. ii. 10. 

(d) 1 Cor. v. 4. 

(e) Part 2, Acts iii. 



52 Vlt. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
A. I). 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683, 


St. Matth. 
chap. ii. 
verse 6 ; 
Micah. 
chap. v. 
verse 2. 


Ex te enim cxiet 
dux, qui " regal" 
populum meum Is- 
rael. ^WiB Wii>. rS 
ft»-at elg d^ffWa to 


For out of th^e 
shall come forth the 
Captain, that shall 
" rule" my people 
Israel. 


Instead of " rule," 
the NewTestament, 
printed anno 1580, 
translates " feed. " 
(1) 


Corrected. 


1 Peter- 
chap, ii. 
verse 13. 


Subjecli. igitur 
estote " omni hu- 
manm creatura" 
Tidrrrj (tvdpunlvri 
xi loe i, propter Deum, 
sive "regi quasi pr&- 
cellenti," sive duci- 
bus, dfC., (lagdtl tier 
{<ne()£xovTi. (2) 


Be subject there- 
fore " to every hu- 
man creature" for 
God, whether it be 
to the " king, as 
excelling," &c. 


In the latter end 
of king Henry VIII. 
and in Edward VI. 
times, they transla- 
ted, " submit your- 
selves unto all man- 
ner of ordinance of 
man," whether it be 
unto the " king, as 
to the chief head." 
IntheBible of 1577, 
to the "king, as hav- 
ing pre-eminence." 
IntheBible of 1579, 
to ihe " king, as the 
superior." (2) 


Submit yourselves 
"to every ordinance 
of man," for the 
Lord's sake, whether 
it be to the " king, 
as supreme. 


Acts of 
the Apos. 
chap. xx. 
verse 28. 


Altendite vobis et 
universo gregi, in 
quo vos Spiritus 
Sanctus posuit"epis- 
copos regere eccle- 
siam" Dei. 'Ema. 
xdrry; noi/ndcvBiv r^f 
ixxlr/alav tS 0ec.(3) 


Take heed to 
yourselves, and to 
the whole flock, 
wherein the Holy 
Ghost hath placed 
you " bishops to 
rule the church" of 
God. 


— Wherein the 
Holy Ghost hath 
made you " over- 
seers, to feed the 
congregation" of 
God. (3) 


— Wherein the 
Holy Ghost hath 
made you " over- 
seers, to feed the 
church" of God. 



EPISCOPAL AUTHORITY. 



53 



( 1 ) It is certain, that this is a false translation ; 
because the prophet's words (Mich, v., cited 
by St. Matthew) both in Hebrew and Greek, 
signify only a Ruler or Governor, and not a 
Pastor or Feeder. Therefore, it is either a 
great oversight, which is a small matter, com- 
pared to the least corruption ; or else it is done 
on purpose ; which I rather think, because they 
do the like in another place, (Acts, xx.) as you 
may see below. And that to suppress the signi- 
fication of ecclesiastical power and government, 
that concurs with feeding, first in Christ, and 
from him in his apostles and pastors of the 
church ; both which are here signified in this 
one Greek word, noi^tabu ; to wit, that Christ 
our Saviour shall rule and feed, (a) yea, he 
shall rule with a rod of iron ; and from him, St. 
Peter, and the rest, by his commission given in 
the same word, noiuutve, feed and rule nay 
sheep; yea, and that with a rod of iron : as when 
he struck Ananias and -Sapphira with corporal 
death ; as his successors do the like offenders with 
spiritual destruction, (unless they repent) by the 
terrible rod of excommunication. This is import- 
ed in the double signification of the Greek word, 
which they, to diminish ecclesiastical authority, 
rather translate "feed," than "rule or govern." 

(2) For the diminution of this ecclesiastical 
authority, they translated this text of scripture, 
in King Henry VIII. and King Edward VI. 
times, " Unto the king, as the chief head," 
(1 Pet. ii.) because then the king had first taken 
upon him this title of " Supreme head of the 
Church." And therefore, they flattered both 
him and his young son, till their heresy was 
planted ; making the holy scripture say, that 
the king was the " chief head," which is all the 
same with supreme head. But, in Queen Eliza- 
beth's time, being, it seems, better advised in 
that point, (by Calvin, I suppose, and the Mag- 
deburgenses, who jointly inveighed against that 
title ; (b) and Calvin, against that by name, which 
was given to Henry VIII.,) and because, perhaps, 
they thought they could be bolder with a queen 
than a king ; as also, because then they thought 
their Reformation pretty well established; they be- 
gan to suppress this title in their translations, and 
to say, " To the king, as having pre-eminence," 
and, " To the king, as the superior ;" endeavour- 
ing, as may be supposed by this translation, to 
encroach upon that ecclesiastical and spiritual ju- 
risdiction they had formerly granted to the Crown. 

But however that be, let them either justify 
their translation, or confess their fault ; and for 
the rest, I will refer them to the words of St. 
Ignatius, who lived in the apostles' time, and 
tells us, " That we must first honour God, then 
the bishop, then the king ; because in all things, 
nothing is comparable to God ; and in the 
church, nothing greater than the bishop, who is 
consecrated to God, for the salvation of the 
world ; and among magistrates and temporal 
rulers, none is like the king." (c) 

(a) Psalm ii. ; Apocalyp. ii. 27 ; Job. xxi. 

(b) Calvin in cap. vii. Amos ; Magdebur. in Preef. 
Cent. 7, fol. 9, 10, 11. 

(c) Ep. 7, ad. Smyrnenses. 

7 



(3) Again, observe how they here suppress 
the word " bishop," and translate it " overseers ;" 
which is a word, that has as much relation to a 
temporal magistrate, as to a bishop. And this 
they do, because in King Edward VI. and Queen 
Elizabeth's time, they had no episcopal conse- 
cration, but were made only by their letters 
patent ; (d) which, I suppose, they will not deny. 
However, when they read of King Edward VI. 
making John a Lasco (a Polonian) overseer or 
superintendent, by his letters patent ; and of 
their making each other superintendents or pas- 
tors at Frankfort, by election ; and such oidy 
to continue for a time, or so long as themselves 
or the congregation pleased, and then to return 
again to the state of private persons or laymen ; 
(vid. Hist, of the Troubles at Frankfort ;) (e) 
and also of King Edward's giving power and au- 
thority to Cranmer : and how Cranmer, when 
he made priests by election only, I suppose, be- 
cause they were to continue no longer than the 
king pleased, whereas priests truly consecreated 
are marked with an indelible character, — pre- 
tended to no other authority for such act, but 
only what he received from the king, by virtue of 
his letters patent. Fox, torn. 2, an. 1546, 
1547. 

And we have reason to judge, that Matthew 
Parker, and the rest of Queen Elizabeth's new 
bishops, were no otherwise made, than by the 
queen's letters patent ; seeing that the form 
devised by King Edward VI. being repealed by 
Queen Mary, was not again revived till the 8th 
of Queen Elizabeth. To say nothing of the 
invalidity of the said form, as having neither 
the name of bishop nor priest in it, the like doubt 
of their consecration arises from the many and 
great objections made by Catholic writers (f) 
against their pretended Lambeth Records and 
Register ; as also from the consecrators of M. 
Parker, viz., Barlow, Scorey, &c, whom we 
cannot believe to have been consecrated them- 
selves, unless they can first show us records of 
Barlow's consecration; and secondly, tell us, 
by what form of consecration Coverdale and 
Scorey were made bishops ; the Rom. Cath- ordi- 
nal having been abrogated, and the new one not 
yet devised, at the time that Mason says they were 
consecrated, which was Aug. 30, 1551. And as 
for the suffragan, there is such a difference about 
his name, (g) some calling him John, some Rich- 
ard ; and about the place where he lived, some 
calling him suffragan of Bedford, (h) some of 
Dover, (?) that it is doubtful whether there was 
such a person present at that Lambeth ceremony. 
But these things being fitter for another treatise, 
which, I hope, you will be presented with ere 
long, I shall say no more of them in this place. 

(d) K. Edw. VI. Let. Pat. Jo. Utenti. p. 71 ; Regist. Ec- 
cles. peregr. Londin. Calvin, p. 327, Resp. ad Persecnt. 
Angl. 

(e) Hist. Fra. p. 51, 60, 62, 63, 72, 73, 74, 87, 97, 99, 
125, 126, &c. 

(/) Fitzherb. Dr. Champ. Nullity of the English 
Clergy Prot. demonst. &c. 

(g) See Dr. Bramhall, p. 98. 

(h) Mason, Bramhall, &c. 

(i) Dr. Butler Epist. de Consecrat. Minist. 



54 



VIII. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579., 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683. 


1 Corinth, 
chap. ix. 
verse 5. 


Numquid non ha- 
bemus poteslaiem 
" mulicrem ," soro- 
rem,&Scl<pi\i' yvKxlxa, 
circumducendi ? <$fC. 
(1) 


Have not we 
power to lead about 
a " woman," a sis- 
ter? &c. 


Have not we 
power to lead about 
a " wife," a sister ? 
&c. (1) 


Instead of " wo- 
man," they trans- 
late " wife," here 
also. 


Philipp. 
chap. iv. 
verse 3. 


Etiam rogo ct te 
germane " cotnpar," 
ov'£vys yvi\oie. (2) 


Yea, and I be- 
seech thee, my sin- 
cere " companion." 


For companion, 
they say, " yoke- 
fellow." (2) 


— " Yoke-fellow." 


Hebrews 
chap. xiii. 
verse 4. 


" Honorabile con- 
nubium in omnibus" 
rlftiogbyduog iv nuoi, 
et thorus immacula- 
tus. (3) 


" Marriage hon- 
ourable in all," and 
the bed undeliled. 


"Wedlock is hon- 
ourable among all 
men," &c. (3) 


" Marriage is hon- 
ourable in all." 


St. Matth. 
chap. xix. 
Terse 11. 


Qui dixit illis, 
" Non omnes capi- 
unC verbum istud, 
& n&vTsg ^w^So-t, sed 
quibus datum est. {A) 


Who said to them, 
" Not all take this 
word," but they to 
whom it is given. ' 


— " All men can- 
not receive this say- 
ing," &c. (4) 


— " All men can- 
not receive this say- 
ing," &c. 


St. Matth. 
chap. xix. 
verse 12. 


Et sunt "enunchi" 
qui seipsos castrave- 
runl, evvb/oi o'uiveg, 
h\ivts%iQav sav lovg, 
propter regnum cce- 
lorum. (5) 


And there are 
" eunuchs," who 
have made them- 
selves " eunuchs" 
for the kingdom of 
heaven. 


There are some 
" chaste," which 
have made them- 
selves " chaste" for 
the kingdom of hea- 
ven. (5) 

i 


Corrected. 



THE SINGLE LIVES OF PRIESTS. 



55 



(1) "If," says St. Hierom, "none of the 
laity, or of the faithful, can pray, unless he for- 
bear conjugal duty, priests, to whom it belongs 
to offer sacrifices for the people, are always to 
pray ; if to pray always, therefore perpetually to 
live single or unmarried." (a) But our late pre- 
tended reformers, the more to profane the sacred 
order of priesthood, to which continency and 
single life have always been annexed in the New 
Testament, and to make it merely laical and 
popular, will have all to be married men : yea, 
those that have vowed to the contrary : and it is 
a great credit among them, for apostate priests 
to take wives. And therefore, by their falsely 
corrupting this text of St. Paul, they will needs 
have him to say, that he, and the rest of the apos- 
tles, " led their wives about with them," (as King 
Edward the Sixth's German apostles did theirs, 
when they came first into England, at the call of 
the Lord-protector Seymour ;) whereas the 
apostle says nothing else, but a woman, a sis- 
ter ; meaning such a Christian woman as fol- 
lowed Christ and the apostles, to find and main- 
tain them with their substance. So does St. 
Hierom interpret it, (b) and St. Augustine also, 
both directly proving, that it cannot be translated 
" wife." (2) Neither ought this text to be trans- 
lated " yoke-fellow," as our innovators do, on 
purpose to make it sound in English, " man and 
wife;" indeed, Calvin and Beza translate it in 
the masculine gender, for a " companion." And 
St. Theophylact, a Greek father, saith, that " if 
St. Paul had spoken of a woman, it should have 
been yvijgia, in Greek." St. Paul says himself, 
he had no wife, (1 Cor. vii.) and I think we 
have a little more reason to believe him, than 
those who would gladly have him married on 
purpose to cloak the sensuality of a few fallen 
priests. In the first chapter of the Acts, ver. 
14, Beza translates, cum exoribus, " with their 
wives," because he would have all the apostles 
there esteemed as married men ; whereas the 
words our cum mulieribus, " with the women," as 
our English translations also have it ; because, 
in this place, they were ashamed to follow their 
master Beza. 



(3) Again, for the marriage of priests, and 
all sorts of men. indifferently, they corrupt this 
text, making two falsifications in one verse : the 
one is, " among all men :" the other, that they 
make it an affirmative speech, by adding " is ;" 
whereas the apostle's words are these : " Mar- 
riage honourable in all, and the bed undefiled ;" 
which is rather an exhortation ; as if he should 
say, " let marriage be honourable in all, and the 
bed undefiled ;" as appears, both by that which 
goes before, and that which follows immediate- 
ly ; all which are exhortations. Let, therefore, 



(a) St. Hierom., lib. contr. Jovin., cap. 19 ; 1 Cor. 
vii. 5, 35. 

(J) Lib. 1, adversus Jovin., de Op. Mon., cap. 4 ; Lib- 
2, eap. 24. 



Protestants give us a reason out of the Greek 
text, why they translate the words following, by 
way of exhortation, " Let your conversation be 
without covetousness ;" and not these words also 
in like manner, " Let marriage be honourable in 
all." The phraseology and construction of both 
are similar in the Greek. 



(4) Moreover, it is against the profession of 
continency in priests and others, that they trans- 
late our Saviour's words respecting a " single 
life," and the unmarried state, thus, " all men can- 
not," &c, as though it were impossible to live 
continent, where Christ said not, " that all men 
cannot," but " all men do not receive this say- 
ing." St. Augustine says, " Whosoever have 
not this gift of chastity given them, it is either 
because they will not have it, or because they 
fulfil not that which they will : and they that 
have this word, have it of God, and their own 
free will." (c) " This gift," says Origen, " is 
given to all that ask for it." (d) 



(5) Nor do they translate this text exactly, 
nor, perhaps, with a sincere meaning ; for, if 
there be chastity in marriage, as well as in the 
single life, as Paphnutius the confessor most 
truly said, and as themselves are wont often to 
allege, then their translation doth by no means 
express our Saviour's meaning, when they say, 
" there are some chaste, who have made them- 
selves chaste," &c, for a man might say all do 
so, who live chastely in matrimony. But our 
Saviour speaks of such as have made themselves 
eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven ; not by 
cutting off those parts which belong to gene- 
ration, for that would be an horrible and mortal 
sin ; but by making themselves unable and 
impotent for generation, by promise, and vow 
of perpetual chastity, which is a spiritual castra- 
tion of themselves. 



St. Basil calls the marriage of the clergy 
" fornication," and not " matrimony." " Of 
canonical persons," says he, " the fornication 
must not be reputed matrimony, because the 
conjunction of these is altogether prohibited ; 
for this is altogether profitable for the security 
of the church." And in his epistle to a certain 
prelate, he cites these words from the Council 
of Nice ; " It is by the great council forbidden, 
in all cases whatsoever, that it should be lawful 
for a bishop, priest, or deacon, or for any whom- 
soever, that are in orders, to have a woman live 
with them ; except only their mother, sister, or 
aunt, or such persons as are void of all suspi- 
cion. "(e) 



(c) Lib. de Gratia et Liber. Arbitr., cap. 4- 
{d) Tract 7, in Matth. 

(e) St. Basil, Ep. 1, ad Amphiloch. ; Ep. 17, ad Pare- 
gor. Presbyt. Con. Nice, in Cod. Grae. Can. 3. 



56 



IX. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemtsh 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683, 


Acts of 
the Apos. 
chap. xix. 
verse 3. 


" In quo, tig tI, 
ergo baptizati estis? 
qui dixerunt, " In" 
Johannis baptismate. 
(1) 


" In" what then 
were you baptized ? 
who said, " In" 
John's baptism. 


" Unto " t what 
then were you bap- 
tized 1 " And they" 
said, " Unto" John's 
baptism. (1) 


" Unto" what then 
were ye baptized? 
And they said, "Un- 
to" John's baptism. 


Titus 
chap. iii. 
verses 5, 6. 


Non ex operibus 
justitice, qua fecimus 
nos, sed secundum 
suam misericordiam 
salvos nos fecit ; per 
lavacrum regenera- 
tions et renovation- 
is Spiritus Sancli, 
"quern effudit" in nos 
abunde per Jesum 
Christum Salvato- 
rem nostrum. (2) 


Not by the works 
of justice, which we 
did ; but according 
to his mercy, he 
hath saved us ; by 
the laver of regene- 
ration, and renova- 
tion of the Holy 
Ghost, " whom he 
hath poured" upon 
us abundantly, by 
Jesus Christ our 
Saviour. 


— By the " foun- 
tain" of the regene- 
ration of the Holy 
Ghost, " which he 
shed on" us, &c.(2) 


i 

Not by works of 
righteousness, which 
we have done ; but 
according to his 
mercy, he saved us ; 
by the " washing" of 
regeneration,and re- 
newing of the Holy 
Ghost, " which he 
shed" on us, &c. 



THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM. 



In the beginning of the reformation, they not 
only took away five of the seven sacraments, 
but also deprived the rest of all grace, virtue, 
and efficacy ; making them no more than poor 
and beggarly elements ; at the most, no better 
than those of the Jewish law. And this, be- 
cause they would not have them by any means 
helpful, or necessary towards our salvation ; for 
the obtaining of which, they held and asserted, 
that " faith alone was sufficient." (a) 



For which reason Beza was not content to 
say, with the apostle, (Rom. iv. 11,) " That 
circumcision was a seal of the justice of faith ;" 
but because he thought that term too low for 
the dignity of circumcision, he (to use his own 
■words) " gladly avoids it ;" putting the verb 
instead of the noun, quod obsignaret, for sigil- 
lum. And in his annotations upon the same 
place, he declares the reason of his so doing to 
be, the dignity of circumcision equal with any 
sacrament in the New Testament. His words 
are, " What could be more magnificently spoken 
of any sacrament 1 Therefore, they that make 
a real difference between the sacraments of the 
Old Testament and ours, never seem to have 
known how far Christ's office extendeth :" which 
he says, not to magnify the old, but to disgrace 
the new. 



(1) This is also the cause, why the firstEnglish 
Protestant translators corrupted this place in 
the Acts, to make no difference between John's 
baptism and Christ's, saying : " Unto what then 
were you baptized ? And they said, Unto John's 
baptism." Which Beza would have to be spoken 
of John's doctrine, and not of his baptism in 
water ; as if it had been said, " What doctrine 
do ye profess V and they said, " Johns ;" 
whereas, indeed, the question is, " In what 
then ?" or " wherein were you baptized ?" and 
they said, " In John's baptism ;" as if they would 
say, we have received John's baptism, but not the 
Holy Ghost, as yet : whence immediately follows, 
' then they were baptized in the name of 
Jesus :" and after imposition of hands, " the 
Holy Ghost came upon them :" whence appears, 
the insufficiency of John's baptism, and the great 
difference between it and Christ's. And this so 
much troubles the Bezaites, that Beza himself 
expresses his grief in these words : " It is not 
necessary, that wheresoever there is mention of 
John's baptism, we should think it the very 
ceremony of baptism ; therefore they, who 
gather that John's baptism differs from Christ's, 
because these, a little after, are said to be bap- 
tized in the name of Jesus Christ, have no sure 
foundation." See his annotations on Acts xix. 
Thus he endeavours to take away the foundation 

(a) Twenty-fifth of the Thirty-nine Articles. 



57 

of this Catholic conclusion, that John's baptism 
differs from, and is far inferior to Christ's. 

Beza confesses, that the Greek elg it is often 
used for " wherein" or " wherewith :" as it is in 
the Vulgate Latin, and Erasmus ; but he, and 
his followers, think it signifies not so here ; 
though but the second verse after, (verse 5,) 
the very same Greek phrase els to ovo/xa is by 
them translated " In ;" where they say, " that 
they were baptized in," not unto, the name of 
Jesus Christ. 



(2) But no wonder, if they disgraced the 
baptism of Christ, when some (b) of them durst 
presume to take it away, by interpreting these 
words of the Gospel : " Unless a man be born 
again of water, and the Spirit," &c, in this 
manner, " Unless a man be born again of water, 
that is, the Spirit ;" as if by water, in this place, 
were only meant the Spirit allegorically, and not 
material water : as though our Saviour had said 
to Nicodemus : " Unless a man be born again of 
water, I mean of the Spirit, he cannot enter into 
the kingdom of heaven." To which purpose, 
Calvin as falsely translates the apostle's words 
to Titus (c) thus : Per lavacrum regenerationis 
Spiritus Sancti, quod effudit in nos abunde ; 
making the apostle say : " That God poured the 
water of regeneration upon us abundantly ;" that 
is, " the Holy Ghost :" and lest we should not 
understand him, he tells us, in his commentary 
on this place, " that the apostle, speaking of 
water poured out abundantly, speaks not of ma- 
terial water, but of the Holy Ghost :" whereas 
the apostle makes not " water" and the " Holy 
Ghost" all one ; but most plainly distinguishes 
them ; not saying, that " water" was poured out 
upon us, as they would infer, by translating it 
" which he shed ;" but the " Holy Ghost, whom 
he hath poured out upon us abundantly." So 
that here is meant both the material water, or 
washing of baptism, and the effect thereof, which 
is, the Holy Ghost poured out upon us. 



But, if I blame our English translators, in 
this place, for making it indifferent, either 
" which fountain," or " which Holy Ghost he 
shed," &c, they will tell me, that the Greek is 
also indifferent : but, if we demand of them, 
whether the Holy Ghost, or rather a fountain of 
water, may be said to be shed, they must doubt- 
less confess, not the Holy Ghost, but water : 
and consequently, their translating " which he 
shed," instead of" " whom he poured out," would 
have it denote the " fountain of water ;" thereby 
agreeing with Calvin's translation, and Beza's 
commentary ; for Beza, in his translation, refers 
it to the Holy Ghost, as Catholics do. 



b) Beza in Jo. iv. 10, and in Tit. iii. 5. 
'c) Calvin's Translation in Tit. iii. 5. 



58 X. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683. 


St. James 
chap. v. 
verse 16. 


" Confitemini, " 
kl-o/xoloysiodB, ergo, 
alter utrum " pec- 
cala" vestra. (1) 


" Confess," there- 
fore,your "sins" one 
to another. 


" Acknowledge " 

o 

your " faults " one 
to another. (1) 


" Confess " your 
" faults," &c. 


St. Matth. 
chap. xi. 
verse 21 ; 
St. Luke 
chap. x. 
verse 13. 


— Si in Tyro et 
Sidone facta essent 
virtutes, qum facta 
sunt in vobis, olim in 
cilicio et cinere " pai- 
nitentiam egissent," 
fisievdrjoav, (2) 


— If in Tyre and 
Sidon had been 
wrought the mira- 
cles that have been 
done in you, " they 
had done penance" 
in sackcloth and 
ashes, long ere now. 


Beza in all his 
translations has, 
" they had amended 
their lives." And 
our other transla- 
tions say, " they 
would have repen- 
ted." (2) 


Instead of " they 
had done penance," 
they say, " they 
would have repen- 
ted." 


St. Matth. 
chap. iii. 
verse 2. 


"Poznitentiam agite," 
appropinquabit enim 
regnum cazlorum. 


" Do penance," for 
the kingdom of hea- 
ven is at hand. 


" Repent," for the 
kingdom of heaven 
is at hand. 


" Repent," &c. 


St. Luke 
chap. iii. 
verse 3. 


Predicans baptis- 
mum " poenitentice." 


— Preaching the 
baptism of " pe- 
nance." 


Preaching the bap- 
tism of " repen- 
tance." 


— i Preaching the 
baptism of " repen- 
tance." 


St. Luke 
chap. iii. 
verse 8. 


Facile ergo fructus 
dignos "panitentias." 


Yield, therefore, 
fruits worthy of 
" penance." 


— Worthy of "re- 
pentance." Beza 
says, " Do fruits 
meet for them that 
amend their lives." 


— Fruit worthy of 
" repentance." 


Acts of 
the Apos. 
chap. ii. 
verse 38. 


Petrus vero ad 
illos " pcenite?itiam 
(inquit) agite" et 
baptizelur unusquis- 
que vestrum in no- 
mine Jesu Christi. 


But Peter said to 
them, "do penance," 
and be every one of 
you baptized in the 
name of JesusChrist. 


— " Repent," and 
be every one of you 
baptized, &c. 


— " Repent," and 
be baptized, &c. 



CONFESSION AND THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE. 



59 



(1) To avoid this term " confession," especially 
in this place, whence the reader might easily 
gather " sacramental confession," they thus fal- 
sify the text. It is said a little before, " if any 
be sick, let him bring in the priests," &c. And 
then it follows, " confess your sins," &c. But 
they, to make sure work, say, acknowledge, 
instead of confess ; and for priests, " elders," 
and for sins, they had rather say faults ; " ac- 
knowledge your faults," to make it sound among 
the ignorant common people, as different as they 
can from the usual Catholic phrase, " Confess 
your sins." What mean they by this ?" If this 
acknowledging of faults one to another, before 
death, be indifferently made to all men, why do 
they appoint in their common prayer-book, (a) 
(as it seems, out of this place,) that the sick 
person shall make a special confession to the 
minister ; and he shall absolve him in the very 
same form of absolution that Catholic priests 
use in the sacrament of penance 1 And again, 
seeing themselves acknowledge forgiveness of 
sins by the minister, why do they not reckon 
penance, of which confession is a part, amongst 
the sacraments ? But, I suppose, when they 
translated their Bibles, they were of the same 
judgment with the ministers of the diocess of 
Lincoln, (b) who petitioned to have the words 
of absolution blotted out of the common prayer- 
book ; but when they visit the sick, they are of 
the judgment of Roman Catholics, who, at this 
day, hold confession and absolution necessary to 
salvation, as did also the primitive Christians. 
Witness St. Basil : " Sins must necessarily be 
opened unto those, to whom the dispensations 
of God's mysteries is committed." St. Am- 
brose : " If thou desirest to be justified, confess 
thy sin : for a sincere confession of sins dissolves 
the knot of iniquity." (c) 



(2) As for penance, and satisfaction for sins, 
they utterly deny it, upon the heresy of, " only 
faith justifying and saving a man." Beza pro- 
tests, that he avoids these terms, fteraroia, 
pwnitentia, and fiBravoene, panitentiam agile, 
of purpose : and says, that in translating these 
Greek words, he will always use, resipiscentia 
and resipiscite, " amendment of life," and " amend 
your lives." And our English Bibles, to this 
day, dare not venture on the word penance, 
but only repentance ; which is not only far 
different from the Greek word, but even from 
the very circumstance of the text ; as is evi- 
dent from those words of St. Matth. xi., and 
Luke x., were these words, " sackcloth and 
ashes," cannot but signify more than the word 
repentance, or amendment of life can denote ; 
as is plain from these words of St Basil, (d) 

(a) Visitation of the Sick. 

(b) Survey of the Common Prayer-Book. 

(c) St. Basil, in Regulis Brevior., Interrogatione 288. 
St. Amb., lib. de Pcenit., cap. 6. 

(d) St Basil in Psalm xxix ; St. Aug. Horn. 27- Inter- 
50 H. et Ep. 108; Sozom., Lib. 7, cap. 16. See St. 
Hierom. in Epitaph. Fabiol. 



" Sackcloth makes for penance ; for the fathers, 
in old time, sitting in sackcloth and ashes, did 
penance." Do not St. John Baptist, and St. 
Paul, plainly signify penitential works, when 
they exhort us to " do fruits worthy of penance ?" 
which penance St. Augustine thus declares : 
" There is a more grievous and more mournful 
penance, whereby properly they are called in 
the church, that are penitents : removed also 
from partaking the sacrament of the altar." And 
Sozomen, in his ecclesiastical history, says, " In 
the Church of Rome, there is a manifest and 
known place for the penitents, and in it they 
stand sorrowful, and as it were mourning, and 
when the sacrifice is ended, being not made par- 
takers thereof, with weeping and lamentations 
they cast themselves far on the ground : then 
the bishop, weeping also with compassion, lifts 
them up ; and, after a certain time enjoined, 
absolves them from their penance. This the 
priests or bishops of Rome keep, from the very 
beginning, even until our time." 



Not only Sozomen, but (e) Socrates also, a»d 
all the ancient fathers, when they speak of 
penitents, that confessed and lamented their 
sins, and were enjoined penance, and performed 
it, did always express it in the said Greek words ; 
which, therefore, are proved most evidently to 
signify penance, and doing penance. Again, 
when the ancient Council of Laodicea (f) says, 
that the time of penance should be given to 
offenders, according to the proportion of the 
fault : and that such shall not communicate till 
a certain time ; but after they have done pen- 
ance, and confessed their fault, (g) are then to 
be received : and when the first Council of Nice 
speaks of shortening or prolonging the days of 
penance : when (h) St. Basil speaks after the 
same manner ; when St. Chrysostom calls the 
sackcloth and fasting of the Ninevites, for cer- 
tain days, " Tot dierurn pcenitentiam, so many 
days of penance :" in all these places, I would 
demand of our translators of the English Bible, 
if all these speeches of penance, and doing 
penance, are not expressed by the said Greek 
words ? and I would ask them, whether in these 
places, where there is mentioned a proscribed 
time of satisfaction for sin, by such and such 
penal means, they will translate repentance and 
amendment of life only ? Moreover, the Latin 
Church, and all the ancient fathers thereof, 
have always read, as the Vulgate Latin inter- 
preter translates, and do all expound the same 
penance, and doing penance : for example, see 
St. Augustine, among others ; (i) where you 
will find it plain, that he, speaks of " penitential 
works, for satisfaction of sins." 



,e) Socrat., lib. 5, cap. 19. 

(/) Council of Laodicea, Can. 2, 9, et 19. 

(g) 1 Council of Nice, Can. 12. 

(A) St. Basil, cap. 1, ad Amphiloch. 

(i) St. August., Ep. 108. 



60 XI. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bihles, printed 
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683, 


St. Luke 
chap. i. 
verse 28. 


Ave, " gratia 
plena," Dominus le 

CUm, XSXVtQlTWltlfT]. 

(1) 


Hail, " full of 
grace," our Lord is 
with thee. 


Hail, " thou that 
art freely beloved." 
In Bib. 1577, "thou 
that art in high fa- 
vour." (1) 


In Bib. 1637, 
Hail, " thou that art 
highly favoured." In 
Bib. 1683, Hail, 
" thou that art high- 
ly favoured," our 
Lord is with thee. 


St. Matth. 
chap. i. 
verse 25. 


Et " vocavit" no- 
nomen ejus Jesum, 

XiXl EXfthsOE 10 Ol'Ofla 

avzu Iqouv. (2) 


And " called" his 
name Jesus. 


And " he" called 
his name Jesus. (2) 


And " he" called 
his name Jesus. 


Genesis 
chap. iii. 

vprop 1 S 


" Ipsa" conteret 
caput tuum, et tu 

l/lolt-tlllULflO Is Lib- 

caneo ejus. (3) 


"She" shall bruise 
thy head in pieces, 

p nn * ' Innti Qnult ltc» 
clllLL 111UU olidlL lie 

in wait for her heel." 


" It" shall bruise 
thy head, and thou 

Ctnsilf' " KrnTtto hie 

ill till Ul UlOtJ Illo 

heel." (3) 


" It" shall bruise 
thy head, and thou 

c nn It " ni'incp rtiQ 
oil a 11 UI UloC 1115 

heel." 


2 St. Peter 
chap. i. 
verse 15. 


Dabo autcm operam 
et frequenter habere 
vos post obitum me- 
urn, ut " horum me- 
moriarn" faciatis.{A) 


And I will do my 
endeavour ; you to 
have often after my 
decease also, that 
you may keep a 
" memory of these 
things." 


I will endeavour 
that you may be 
able, after my de- 
cease, to have these 
things " always in 
remembrance." (4) 


I will endeavour, 
that you may be 
able after my de- 
cease, to have "these 
things always in re- 
membrance." 


Psalm 
cxxxviii. 
Eng. Bib., 
cxxxix. 
verse 17. 


Nimis honortjicati 
sunt amici tui, "^"P, 
oi q>i).ot an, Deus ; ni- 
mis confortatus est 
principatus eorum, 
nrraso ]Dty, at aoxai 
avxwv . (5) 


Thy friends, 
God, are become 
exceedingly honour- 
able ; their prince- 
dom is exceedingly 
strengthened. 


How dear are 
thy counsels (or 
thoughts) to me ? 
! how great is the 
sum of them ? (5) 


How precious also 
are thy thoughts un- 
to me, God ! How 
great is the sum of 
them ! 



THE HONOUR OF OUR B LESS K D LADY AND OTHER SAINTS. 



61 



(1) The most blessed Virgin, and glorious 1 
mother of Christ, has by God's holy Church 
always been honoured with most magnificent 
titles and addresses. One of the first four general 
councils gives her the transcendent title of the 
mother of God. (a) And by St. Cyril of Alexan- 
dria, she is saluted in these words, " Hail ! holy 
mother of God, rich treasure of the world, ever- 
shming lamp, crown of purity, and sceptre of true 
doctrine ; by thee the holy Trinity is every where I 
blessed and adored, the heavens exult, angels 
rejoice, and devils are chased from us : who so 
surpasses in elegance, as to be able to say 
enough to the glory of Mary ?" Yea, the angel 
Gabriel is commissioned from God to address 
himself to her with this salutation, " Hail ! full 
of grace. "(b) Since which time, what has ever 
been more common, and, at this day, more gen- 
eral and useful in all Christian countries, than in 
the Ave Maria to say, gratia plena, " full of 
grace ?■" But, in our miserable land, the holy 
prayer, which every child used to say, is not only 
banished, but the very text of scripture wherein 
our blessed Lady was saluted by the angel, 
" Hail ! full of grace," they have changed into 
another manner of salutation, viz., " Hail ! thou 
that art freely beloved," or, " in high favour." 
(c) I would gladly know from them, why this, i 
or that, or any other thing, rather than " Hail ! 1 
full of grace J" St. John Baptist was full of the 1 
Holy Ghost, even from his birth ; St. Stephen 
was " full of grace, (d) why may not then our Lady 
be called " full of grace," who, as St. Ambrose 
says, " only obtained the grace which no other 
woman deserved, to be replenished with the au- 
thor of grace ?" 

If they say, the Greek word does not signify 
so : I must ask them, why they translate ijAxw- 
fteioa, (e) ulcernsus, " full of sores," and will 
not translate xs/aQiTM/jtvrj, gratiosa, " full of 
grace V Let them tell us what difference there is 
in the nature and significancy of these two words. 
If ulcerosus, as Beza translates it, be " full of 
sores," why is not gratiosa, as Erasmus trans- 
lates it, " full of grace V seeing that all such 
adjectives in osus signify fulness, as periculosus, 
asrumnosus, &c, as every school-boy knows. 
What syllable is there in this word, that seems 
to make it signify " freely beloved?" St. Chry- 
sostom, and the Greek doctors, who should best 
know the nature of this Greek word, say, that 
it signifies to make gracious and acceptable. 
St. Athanasius, a Greek doctor, says, that our 
blessed Lady had this title, xex a Q tTU f J ^ t 'l, be- 
cause the Holy Ghost descended into her, filling 
her with all graces and virtues. And St. Hierom 
reads gratia plena, and says plainly, she was so 
saluted, " full of grace," because she conceived 
him in whom all fulness of the Deity dwelt 
corporally, (f) 

(2) Again, to take from the holy mother of 
God, what honour they can, they translate, 

(a) Cone. Eph., cap. 13. (b) St. Luke i. 18. 
(e) St. Luke i. 15. (d) Acts vii. 8. (e) Luke xvi. 20. 
(/) St. Chys. Comment, in Ep. 1 ; St. Athan. de S. 
Deipar; St Hierom. in Ep. 140 in Expos. Psal. xliv. 



that "he (viz. Joseph,) called his name Jesus." 
And why not she, as well as he ? For in St. 
Luke, the angel saith to our Lady also, 
" Thou shalt call his name Jesus." Have 
we not much more reason to think that the 
blessed Virgin, the natural mother of our 
Saviour, gave him the name Jesus, than Joseph, 
his reputed father ; seeing also St. Matthew, 
in this place, limits it neither to him nor her ? 
And the angel revealed the name first unto her, 
saying, that she should so call him. And the 
Hebrew word, Isa. vii., whereunto the angel 
alludes, is the feminine gender ; and by the great 
Rabbins referred unto her, saying expressly, 
in their commentaries, et vocabit ipsa puella s 
&c, " and the maid herself shall call his name 
Jesus." (g) 

(3) How ready our new controllers of antiquity 
and the approved ancient Latin translation, are 
to find fault with this text, Gen. iii., " She shall 
bruise thy head," &c, because it appertains to our 
blessed Lady's honour ; saying, that all ancient 
fathers read ipsum : (Ji) when on the contrary, 
St. Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, 
St. Gregory, St. Bede, St. Bernard, and many 
others, read ipsa, as the Latin text now does. 
And though some have read otherwise, yet, 
whether we read " she" shall bruise, or " her 
seed," that is, her Son, Christ Jesus, we attri- 
bute no more, or no less to Christ, or to his 
mother, by this reading or by that ; as you may 
see, if you please to read the annotations upon 
this place in the Doway Bible. 1 have spoken 
of this in the preface. 

(4) Where the scripture, in the original, is 
ambiguous and indifferent to divers senses, it 
ought not to be restrained or limited by trans- 
lation, unless there be a mere necessity, when it 
can hardly express the ambiguity of the original. 
As for example, in this where St. Peter speaks 
so ambiguously, either that he will remember 

| them after his death, or that they shall remember 
! him. But the Calvinists restrain the sense of 
this place, without any necessity; and that 
i] against the prayer and intercession of saints for 
us, contrary to the judgment of some of the 
Greek fathers ; who concluded from it, " that 
the saints in heaven remember us on earth, and 
lj make intercession for us." 

(5) In fine, this verse of the Psalms, (i) 
I; which is by the church and all antiquity read 
'■ thus, and both sung and said in honour of the 
i; holy apostles, agreeably to that, in another Psalm, 
I "Thou shalt appoint, them princes over all the 
; earth," they translate contrary both to the 
:; Hebrew and the Greek, which is altogether 
I according to the said ancient Latin translation, 
I " How are the heads of them strengthened, or 
! their princedoms V And this they do, pur- 
posely to detract from the honour of the apos- 
tles and holy saints. 

(g) Rabbi Abraham et Rabbi David. 

(h) See the Annot. upon this place in the Doway Bible 

(i) Oecum. in Caten. Gagneius in hunc locum, Psa 
; xliv 



62 



XII. PROTESTANT TRANSLATION'S AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683. 


Hebrews 
chap. xi. 
verse 2 1 . 


Fide, Jacob mo- 
riens, singulos jilio- 
rum Joseph bene 
dixit, et " adoravit 
fastigium virgce 

ejus," nQOOEXilVTjOBV 

ini to &xqov ttjs gafidn 
&UTU. (1) 


By faith, Jacob 
dying, blessed every 
one of the sons of 
Joseph, and "adored 
the top of his rod." 


— And " leaning 
on the end of his 
staff, worshipped 
God." (1) 


By faith Jacob, 
when he was a-dy- 
ing, blessed both the 
sons of Joseph, "and 
worshipped, leaning 
upon the top of his 
staff." 


Genesis 
chap, xlvii. 
verse 31. 


" Adoravit Israel 
Deum, conversus ad" 
lectuli caput. 
nDcrroxn-i? innm^2) 


" Israel adored 
God, turning to" the 
bed's head. 


" Israel worship- 
ped God towards" 
the bed's head. (2) 


And "Israel bowed 
himself upon" the 
bed's head. 


Ps. xcviii. 
verse 5. 
Eng. Bib., 
xcix. 


Exallate Domi- 
num Deum nostrum- 
" et adorate scabel, 
lum pedum ejus" 
quoniam sanctum est. 


Exalt the Lord 
our God, " and 
adore ye the foot- 
stool of his feet," 
"because it" is holy. 


Exalt the Lord 
our God, and "fall 
down before" his 
footstool, "for he" 
is holy. 


Exalt the Lord 
our God, and " wor- 
ship at his footstool," 
" for he" is holy. 


Ps. cxxxi. 
verse 7. 
Eng. Bib., 
cxxxii. 


Introibimus in 
tabernaculurn ejus, 
" adorabimus in loco 
ubi steterunt pedes 
ejus." 


We will enter in- 
to his tabernacle, 
we will " adore in 
the place where his 
feet stood." 


— We will "fall 
down before his foot- 
stool." 


We will go into 
his tabernacles, we 
will "worship at his 
footstool." 



THE DISTINCTION OF RELATIVE AND DIVINE WORSHIP. 



( 1 ) The sacred Council of Trent decrees, that 
" the images of Christ, of the virgin mother of 
God, and of other saints, are to be had and re- 
tained, especially in churches ; and that due 
honour and worship is to be imparted unto them : 
not that any divinity is believed to be in them ; 
or virtue, for which they are to be worshipped ; 
or tnat any thing is to be begged of them ; or 
that hope is to be put in them ; as, in times past, 
the Pagans did, who put their trust in idols ; but 
because the honour which is exhibited to ihem, 
is referred to the archetype, which they resem- 
ble : so that, by the images which we kiss, and 
before which we uncover our heads, and kneel, 
we adore Christ and his saints, whose likeness 
they bear." (a) And the second Council of 
Nice, which confirmed the ancient reverence 
due to sacred images, tells us, " That these 
images the faithful salute with a kiss, and give 
an honorary worship to them, but not the true 
latria, or divine worship, which is according to 
faith, and can be given to none but to God him- 
self." (b) Between which degree of worship, 
latria and dulia, Protestants are so loath to make 
any distinction, that, in this place, they restrain 
the scripture to the sense of one doctor ; inso- 
much that they make the commentary of St. 
Augustine, (peculiar to him alone,) the very text 
of scripture, in their translation ; thereby exclu- 
ding all other senses and expositions of other 
fathers ; who either read and expound, that 
" Jacob adored the top of Joseph's sceptre ;" or 
else, that " he adored towards the top of his 
sceptre :" besides which two meanings, there is 
no other interpretation of this place, in all anti- 
quity, but in St. Augustine only, as Beza him- 
self confesses. And here they add two words 
more than are in the Greek text, " Leaning 
and God :" forcing &vtov to signify dvrov, which 
may be, but is as rare as virga ejus, for virgce 
suce ; and turning the other words clear out of 
their order, place, and form of construction, 
which they must needs have correspondent and 
answerable to the Hebrew text, from whence 
they were translated ; which Hebrew words 
themselves translate in this order, " He wor- 
shipped towards the bed's head ;" and if so, 
according to the Hebrew, then did he worship 
" towards the top of his sceptre," according 
to the Greek ; the difference of both being onlv 
in these words, sceptre and bed ; because the 
Hebrew is ambiguous as to both, and not in the 
order and construction of the sentence. 



(2) But why is it, that they thus boldly add 
in one place, and take away in another ? Why 
do they add " leaned, and God" in one text, 



a) Concil. Trident., Sess. 25. 

b) Concil. Nicen., Act. 7- 



63 

and totally suppress " worshipped God" in 
another ? Is it not because they are afraid, lest 
those expressions might warrant and confirm 
the Catholic and Christian manner of adoring 
our Saviour Christ, towards the holy cross, or 
before his image, the crucifix, the altar, &c. ? 
And though they make so much of the Greek 
particle, em, as to translate it, " leaning upon," 
rather than " towards ;" yet the ancient Greek 
fathers (c) considered it of such little import, 
that they expounded and read the text, as if it 
were for the phrase only, and not for any signi- 
fication at all ; saying, " Jacob adored Joseph's 
sceptre ; the people of Israel adored the temple, 
the ark, the holy mount, the place where his feet 
stood," and the like : whereby St. Damascene 
proves the adoration of creatures, named dulia ; 
to wit, of the cross, and of sacred images. If, I 
say, these fathers make so little force of the 
prepositions, as to infer from these texts, not 
only adoration " towards" the thing, but ado- 
ration " of" the thing ; how come these, our new 
translators, thus to strain and rack the little 
particle, em, to make it signify " leaning upon," 
and utterly to exclude it from signifying any 
thing tending towards adoration 1 



I would gladly know of them, whether in 
these places of the Psalms there be any force in 
the Hebrew prepositions ? Surely no more than 
if we should say in English, without preposi- 
tions, " adore ye his holy will : we will adore the 
place where his feet stood : adore ye his foot- 
stool ;" for they know the same preposition is 
used also, when it is said, " adore ye our Lord ;" 
or, as themselves translate it, " worship the 
Lord ;" where there can be no force nor signi- 
fication of the preposition : and therefore, in 
these places, their translation is corrupt and 
wilful ; when they say, " we will fall down be- 
fore," or, " at his footstool," &c. Where they 
shun and avoid, first, the term of adoration, 
which the Hebrew and Greek duly express, by 
terms correspondent in both languages through- 
out the Bible, and are applied, for the most 
part, to signify adoring of creatures. Secondly 
they avoid the Greek phrase, which is, at least, 
to adore " towards" these holy things and 
places : and much more the Hebrew phrase, 
which is, to adore the very things rehearsed. 
" To adore God's footstool," (as the Psalmist 
saith,) " because it is holy," or, " because he is 
holy," whose footstool it is, as the Greek read- 
eth. And St. Augustine so precisely and reli- 
giously reads, " adore ye his footstool," that he 
examines the case ; and finds, thereby, that the 
blessed sacrament must be adored, and that no 
good Christian takes it, before he adores it. 



(c) St. Chrys. Oecum. in Collection. St. Damasc.,lib. 
1, pro Imaginib , Leont. apud llamas. 



64 



XIII. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


1 

Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
a. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Biole, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683, 


Coloss. 
chap. iii. 

V6VSC 5. 


Et avaritiam, qua; 
est " simulacrorum 
servttus ," & tdoiXolrCtT- 
osia. (1) 


— And avarice, 
which is the " ser- 

vipp nf inmQ - 


— And covetous- 
ness, which is the 

" wftCQninniriff c\ f 

W UI o £11 IJ |J111[^ \Jl 

images." (1) 


— And covetous- 
ness, which is "ido- 
latry.' 


Ephesians 
chap. v. 
verse 5. 


— Aut avarus, quod 
est " idolorum ser- 
vitas ." 


— Or covetous per- 
son, which is " the 

-Ml V J (.. v KJl iUUlo. 


— Or covetous 
man, which is "a 

VVUiolJiUUCl %Jl Ull" 

ages." 


Corrected. 


2 Corinth, 
chap. vi. 
verse 16. 


Quis autem con- 
sensus tetnplo Dei 
cum "idolis?"6idb>\(vv 
(2) 


And what agree- 
ment hath the tem- 
ple of God with 
" idols V* 


How agreeth the 
temple of God with 
" images ?" (2) 


Corrected. 


1 Ep. John 
chap. v. 
verse 21, 


Filioli, custodite 
vos a " simulacris." 
std(aXo)v. 


My little children, 
keep yourselves 
from " idols." 


Babes, keep your- 
selves from "im- 
ages." 


Corrected. 


1 Corinth, 
c hap. x. 
r erse 7. 


" Neque idolatrm 
etduXolaiQat, ejjicia- 
mini,'' sicul quidam 
ex ipsis. 


" Neither become 
ye idolaters," as 
certain of them. 


" Be not wor- 
shippers of images," 
as some of them. 


Corrected also in 
this. 



SACRED 

(1^ Before I proceed in this, let me ask our 
English translators, what is the most proper, 
and best English of sidwkov, slSmloXujmjg, sldujln- 
XuTQeiu ; idolum, idolatra, idolatria? Is it not 
idol, idolator, idolatry 1 Are not these plain 
English words, and well known in our lan- 
guage ? Why then need they put three words 
for one, " worshipper of images," and " wor- 
shipping of images ?" Whether is the more 
natural and convenient speech, either in our 
English tongue, or for the truth of the thing to 
say, as the holy scripture does, "covetousness 
is idolatry ;" and consequently, " the covetous 
man is an idolator ;" or to say, as their first ab- 
surd translations have it, " covetousness is 
worshipping of images," and the " covetous man 
is a worshipper of images V I suppose they will 
scarcely deny, but that there are many covetous 
Protestants, and, perhaps, of their clergy too, 
that may be put in the list with those of whom 
the apostle speaks, when he says, there are 
some " whose belly is their god." And though 
these make an idol of their money, and their 
bellies, by covetousness and gluttony, yet they 
would doubtless take it ill of us, if in their 
own scripture language, we should call them 
" worshippers of images." Who sees not, 
therefore, what great difference there is be- 
tween " idol" and " image," " idolatry" and 
" worshipping of images ?" even so much is 
there between St. Paul's words, and the Pro- 
testant translation ; but because in their latter 
translations they have corrected this shameful 
absurdity, I will say no more of it. 



(2) In this other, not only their malice, but 
their full intent and set purpose of deluding the 
poor simple people appear ; this translation being 
made when images were plucking down through- 
out England, to create in the people a belief, that 
the apostle spoke against sacred images in 
churches ? whereas his words are against the 
idols and idolatry of the Gentiles ; as is plain 
from what goes before, exhorting them not to 
join with infidels ; for, says he, " How agreeth 
the temple of God with idols V not " with 
images," for " images" might be had without 
sin, as we see the Jews had the images of the 
cherubim and the figures of oxen in the temple, 
and the image of the brazen serpent in the 
wilderness, by God's appointment ; though, as 
soon as they began to make an idol of the 
serpent, and adore it as their god, it could no 
longer be kept without sin. By this corrupt 
custom of translating image, instead of idol, they 
so bewitched their deceived followers, as to 
make them despise, contemn, and abandon even 
the very sign and image of salvation, the cross 
of Christ, and the crucifix ; whereby the man- 
ner of his bitter death and passion is represent- 
ed ; notwithstanding their signing and marking 



images. 65 

their children with it in their baptism, when 
they are first made Christians. 

By such wilful corruptions, in these and other 
texts, as, " Be not worshippers of images, as 
some of them ;" and, " Babes, keep yourselves 
from images ;" which, the more to impress on 
the minds of the vulgar, they wrote upon their 
church walls ; the people were animated to 
break down, and cast out of their churches, the 
images of our blessed Saviour, of his blessed 
mother, the twelve apostles, &c, with so full 
and general a resolution of defacing and extir- 
pating all tokens or marks of our Saviour's pas- 
sion, that they broke down the very crosses from 
the tops of church steeples, where they could 
easily come to them. And though, in their 
latter translations, they have corrected this cor- 
ruption ; yet do some of the people so freshly, 
to this day, retain the malice impressed by it 
upon their parents, that they have presumed to 
break the cross lately set on the pinnacle of the 
porch of Westminster abbey : and the more to 
show their spite towards that sacred sign of our 
redemption— the holy cross — they placed it, not 
long since, upon the foreheads of bulls and 
mastiff-dogs, and so drove them through the 
streets of London, to the eternal shame of such 
as receive it in their baptism, and pretend to 
Christianity. What could Jews or Infidels have 
done more ? Was it not enough to break it 
down from the tops of churches, and to put up 
the image of a dragon, (the figure wherein the 
devil himself is usually represented,) as on Bow 
Church, (a) in the midst of the city, but they 
must place it so contemptuously on the fore- 
heads of beasts and dogs 1 



In how great esteem the holy cross was had 
by primitive Christians, the fathers of those days 
have sufficiently testified in their writings : 
" This cross," says St. Chrysostom, " we may 
see solemnly used in houses, in the market, in 
the desert, in the ways, on mountains and hills, 
in valleys," &c, contrary to which, the pretend- 
ed reformers of our times have not only cast it 
out of their houses, but out of their churches 
also : they have broken it down from all market- 
places, from hills, mountains, valleys, and high- 
ways ; so that in all the roads in England there 
is not one cross left standing entire, that I have 
ever heard of, except one called Ralph cross, 
which I have often seen, upon a wild heath or 
mountain, near Danby forest, in the north riding 
of Yorkshire. (&) 



(a) Why might not a cock (the animal by which our 
Saviour was pleased to admonish St. Peter of his sins) 
have been placed upon Covent Garden Church, rather 
than a serpent 1 or a cross on Bow Church, rather than 
a dragon 1 

(b) The inhabitants of Danby, Rosdale, Westerdale, 
and Ferndale, may glory before all parts of England, 
that they have a cross standing to this day in the midst 
of them. 



66 XIV. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 

Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
A. I). 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon. an. 1683. 


1 Corinth, 
chap. v. 
ver. 9, 10. 


Scripsi vobis in 
epislola, ne commis- 
ceamini fornicariis, 
non utique fornica- 
riis Iiujus mundi, aut 
avaris, aut rapaci- 
bus, aut " idolis ser- 
vientibus" elSulol&r- 
qalg, alioquin debue- 
ratis de hoc mundo 
eociisse : nunc autem 
scripsi vobis non 
commisccri ; si is qui 
frater nominatur, est 
fornicator, aut aua- 
rus, aut " idolis ser- 
viens." <$fC, eldulolux. 
Qixig. (1) 


I wrote to you in 
an epistle, not to 
keep company with 
fornicators ; I mean, 
not the fornicators 
of this world, or the 
covetous, or the ex- 
tortioners, or " ser- 
vers of idols ;" other- 
wise you should 
have gone out of this 
world. 

But now I have 
writ to you, not to 
keep company ; if 
he that is named a 
brother be a forni- 
cator, or covetous 
person, or a " ser- 
ver of idols," &c. 


I wrote to you 
" that you should" 
not company with 
fornicators : " and" 
I " meant" not " all 
of" the fornicators 
of this world, "either 
of" the covetous, or 
extortioners, "either 
the idolaters," &c. 

But " that ye" 
company not " toge- 
ther ;" if " any" that 
is " called" a bro- 
ther be a fornica- 
tor, or covetous, or 
a " worshipper of 
images," &c. (1) 


It is corrected in 
this Bible. 


Romans 
chap. xi. 
verse 4. 


Reliqui mild sep- 
tem millia virorum 
qui non curvaverunt 
genua " ante Baal." 
(2) 


I have left me 
seven thousand men 
that have not bowed 
their knees to Baal. 


I have left me 
seven thousand men 
that have not bowed 
their knees to " the 
image of" Baal. (2) 


I have left me 
seven thousand men 
that have not bowed 
their knees to " the 
image of" Baal. 


Acts of 
the Apos. 
chap. xix. 
verse 35. 


Viri Ephesi, quis 
enim est kominum, 
qui nesciat Ephesio- 
rum civitalem cullri- 
cem esse magna 
Diana et " Jovis 
prolix?" tS diongisg ? 


Ye men of Ephe- 
sus, for what man is 
there that knoweth 
not the city of the 
Ephesians to be a 
worshipper of great 
Diana, and " Jupi- 
ter's child ?" 


Instead of " Ju- 
piter's child," they 
translate "the image 
which came down 
from Jupiter." 


And here they 
translate, " the im- 
age which fell down 
from Jupiter." 


Exodus 
chap. xx. 
verse 4. 


Non fades tibi 
"sculptile," ^CB, el'do)- 
).ov. 


Thou shalt not 
make to thyself any 
graven thing." 


Thou shalt not 
make to thyself any 
graven image." 


Thou shalt not 
make to thee any 
" graven image." 



THE USE OF S.*, 

(1) How malicious and heretical was their 
intention, who, in this one sentence, made St. ^ 
Paul seem to speak two distinct things, calling 
the Pagans " idolaters," and such wicked 
Christians as should commit the same impiety, 
" worshippers of images ;" whereas the apostle 
uses but one and the self-same Greek word, in 
speaking both of Pagans and Christians ? It is a 
wilful and most notorious corruption ; for, in the 
first place, the translators, speaking of Pagans, 
render the word in the text " idolater ;" but, in 
the latter part of the verse, speaking of Chris- 
tians, they translate the very same Greek word, 
" worshipper of images," and what reason had 
they for this, but to make the simple and igno- 
rant reader think, that St. Paul speaks here not 
only of Pagan idolaters, but also of Catholic 
Christians, who reverently kneel in prayer before 
the holy cross, or images of our Saviour Christ 
and his saints ; as though the apostle had com- 
manded such to be avoided ? All the other words, 
covetous, fornicators, extortioners, they trans- 
late alike, in both places, with reference both to 
Pagans and Christians : yet the word " idola- 
ters" not so, but Pagans they call " idolaters," 
and Christians, " worshippers of images." Was 
not this done on purpose, to make both seem 
alike, and to intimate that Christians doing 
reverence before sacred images, (which Protes- 
tants call worshipping of images,) are more to 
be avoided than the Pagan idolaters ? whereas 
the apostle, speaking of Pagans and Christians 
that committed one and the self-same, heinous 
sin, commands the Christian in that case to be 
avoided for his amendment, leaving the Pagan 
to himself, and to God, as not caring to judge 
him. 



(2) Besides their falsely translating " image" 
instead of " idol," they have also another way of 
falsifying and corrupting the scripture, by intro- 
ducing the word " image" into the text, when, in 
the Hebrew or Greek, there is no such thing ; 
as in these notorious examples : " to the image 
of Baal : the image that came down from Jupi- 
ter :" where they are not content to understand 
" image" rather than " idol," but they must in- 
trude it into the text, though they know full well 
it is not in the Greek. 

Not unlike this kind of falsification, is that 
which has crept as a leprosy through all their 
Bibles, and which, it seems, they are resolved 
never to correct, viz., their translating sculptile 
and conflatile, graven image, and molten image ; 
namely, in the first commandment ; where they 
cannot be ignorant, that in the Greek it is 
" idol," and in the Hebrew, such a word as sig- 
nifies only a " graven thing," not including this 
word " image." They know that God com- 
manded to make the images of cherubim, and 
of oxen in the temple, and of the brazen serpent 
in the desert ; and therefore, their wisdoms 
might have considered, that he forbad not all 
graven images, but such as the Gentiles make, 
and worshipped for gods ; and therefore, Non 



vci:i:3 rxj&v&i 67 

facirs ttbi sculptile, coincide with those words 
that go before, " Thou shalt have no other gods 
but me." For so to have an image, as to make it 
a god, is to make it more than an image : and 
therefore when it is an idol, as were the idols of 
the Gentiles, then it is forbidden by this com- 
mandment. Otherwise, when the cross stood 
many years upon the table, in Queen Elizabeth's 
chapel, pray was it against this commandment ? 
or was it idolatry in her majesty, and her coun- 
sellors, that appointed it there ? Or do their 
brethren the Lutherans beyond seas, at this day, 
commit idolatry against this commandment, who 
have in their churches the crucifix, and the holy 
images of the mother of God, and of St. John 
the evangelist ? Or if the whole story of the 
Gospel concerning our Saviour Christ, were 
drawn in pictures and images in their churches, 
as it is in many of ours, would they say, it were 
a breach of this commandment ? Fie for shame ! 
fie for shame ! that they should with such into- 
lerable impudence and deceit abuse and bewitch 
the ignorant people against their own knowledge 
and consciences. 



For do they not know, that God many times 
farbad the Jews either to marry or converse 
with the Gentiles, lest they might fall to wor- 
ship their idols, as Solomon did, and as the 
psalm reports of them 1 This then is the 
meaning of the commandment, neither to make 
the idols of the Gentiles, nor any other, either 
like them, or as Jeroboam did in Dan and Be- 
thel, (a) By this commandment we are forbid- 
den, (not to make images, but) to make idols, 
or to worship images, or anything else, as God. 
" I do not," says St. John Damascene, " worship 
an image as God ; but by the images and saints 
I give honour and adoration to God ; for whose 
sake I respect and reverence those that are his 
friends." (b) " All over the world," says Pope 
Adrian I., " wheresoever Christianity is pro- 
fessed, sacred images are honoured by the 
faithful, &c. By the image of the body which 
the Son of God took for our redemption, we 
adore our Redeemer who is in heaven ; far be it 
from us, that we (as some calumniate) should 
make gods of images ; we only express the love 
and zeal we have for God, and his saints : and 
as we keep the books of the holy scripture, so 
do we the images, to remind us of our duty, 
still preserving entire the purity of our faith." 
(c). Learn from St. Jerom, after what manner 
they made use of holy images in his time ; he 
writes in the epitaph of Pauia, " that she adored 
prostrate on the ground, before the cross, as if 
she saw our Lord hanging on it." And in 
Jonas, chap, iv., he proves, that out of the 
veneration and love they had for the apostles, 
they generally painted their images on the ves- 
sels, which are called Saucomaries. And will 
Protestants say, that this was idolatry ? 

(a) 3 Kings xii. 28; Psal. cv. 19. 
(*) St. Jo. Damas., Orat. 3. 

(c> Adrian I, pontif., Ep. ad Constan. et Irenae. Impp. 



68 



^V. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS ACJAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
a. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683. 


Isaiah 
chap. xxx. 
verse 22, 


Et contaminabis 
laminas " sculptili- 
um" argenti tui, et 
vestimentum " con- 
Jlatilis" auritui, <5fe. 
(1) 


And thou shalt con- 
taminate the plates 
of the " sculptiles" 
of thy silver, and 
the garment of the 
" molten " of thy 
gold. 


Ye shall defile 
also the covering of 
the "graven images" 
of silver, and the or- 
nament of thy "mol- 
ten images" of gold. 
(1) 


In this also they 
translate "graven" 
and " molten im- 
ages, " instead of 
"graven" and "mol- 
ten things, " or 
" idols." 


Habba 
chap. ii. 
verse 18. 


Quid prodest 
" sculplUe," quia 
sculpsit Mud factor 
suus " cotijlatile," et 
"imaginem falsamV 

> sylvthav aVTO 


What profiteth the 
" thing engraven," 
that the forger 
thereof hath graven 
it a " molten," and 
a " false image V 


What profiteth 
the " image," for 
the maker thereof 
hath made it an 
" image, " and a 
" teacher of lies ?" 


What profiteth 
the "graven image," 
that the maker there- 
of hath graven it, 
the "molten image," 
and a " teacher of 
lies V 


Daniel 
chap. xiv. 
verse 4. 


Quia non colo 
" idola" manufacta, 

Sldujlot %ElQOTlOC7]Ta. 

(2) 


Because 1 wor- 
ship not " idols " 
made with hands. 


I worship not 
" things " that be 
made with hands. 
(2) 


Though they have 
corrected it, yet the 
two last chapters are 
omitted in their 
small impressions 
for Apocrypha. 



THE USE OF SACRED IMAGES. 



(1) The two Hebrew words, pesilim and mas- 
sechoth, which in the Latin, signify sculptilia and 
conjUuiliu, they in their translation render into 
English by the word images, neither word being 
Hebrew for an image ; thus, if one should ask, 
what is the Latin for an image ? and they 
should tell him sculptile. Whereupon he seeing 
a fair painted image on a table, might perhaps 
say, Ecce egregium sculptile ; which, doubtless, 
every boy in the grammar-school %vould laugh 
at. And this I tell them, because I perceive 
their endeavour to make sculptile and image of 
the same import ; which is most evidently false 
as to their great shame appears from these 
words of Habbakuk ; Quid prodest sculptile ? 
&c, which, contrary to the Hebrew and Greek, 
they translate, " What proflteth the image ?" 
&c, as you may see in the former page. 



I wish every common reader were able to dis- 
cern their falsehood in this place : first, they 
make sculpere sculptile no more than " to make 
an image ;" which being absurd, as I have hinted, 
(because the painter or embroiderer making an 
image cannot be said sculpere sculptile,) might 
teach them that the Hebrew has in it no signifi- 
cation of image, no more than sculpere can 
signify ;< to make an image :" and therefore 
the Greek Ivmbv, and the Latin sculptile, pre- 
cisely, for the most part, express neither more 
nor less than a " thing graven ;" but yet mean 
always by these words, a " graven idol," to 
which signification they are appropriated by use 
of holy scripture ; as are also simulacrum, 
idolum,conflatile, as sometimes imago: in which 
sense of signifying idols, if they did repeat 
images so often, although the translation were 
not precise ; yet it would be in some part toler- 
able, because the sense would be so ; but when 
they do it to bring all holy images into contempt, 
even the image of our Saviour Jesus Christ cru- 
cified, they may justly be controlled for false and 
heretical translators. Conjlalile here also they 
falsely translate image, as they did before in 
Isaiah, and as they have done sculptile, though 
two different words ; and, as is said, each signi- 
fying a thing different from image. But where 
they should translate image, as, Imaginem 
faham, " a false image," they translate another 
thing, without any necessary pretence either of 
Hebrew or Greek, clearly avoiding here the 
name of image, because this place tells them, 
that the holy scripture speaketh against false 
images ; or, as themselves translate, such im- 
ages as teach lies, representing false gods, which 
are not. Idolum nihil est, as the apostle says, 
et non sunt dii, qui manibus fiunt. Which 
distinction of false and true images, our Protes- 
tant translators will not have, because they 
condemn all images, even holy and sacred also ; 
10 



69 

and therefore make the holy scriptures to speak 
herein according to their own fancies. What 
monstrous and intolerable deceit is this ! 



(2) Wherein they proceed so far, that 
when Daniel said to the king, " I worship not. 
idols made with hands, 1 " they make him say, " I 
worship not things that be made with hands," 
leaving out the word idols altogether, as though 
he had said, nothing made with hands was to be 
adored, not the ark, nor the propitiatory, no, 
nor the holy cross itself, on which our Saviour 
shed his precious blood. As before they added 
to the text, so here they diminish and take from 
it as boldly as if there had never been a curse 
denounced against such manglers of holy scrip- 
ture. 



See you not, that it is not enough for them to 
corrupt and falsify the text, and to add and 
take away words and sentences at their plea- 
sure, but their unparalleled presumption em- 
boldens them to deprive the people of whole 
chapters and books, as the two last chapters of 
Daniel, and the rest which they call Apocrypha, 
which are quite left out in their new Bibles. 
When all this is done, the poor simple people 
must be glad of this castrated Bible, for their 
" only rule of faith." V<b ! v<e .' 



The reason they give for rejecting them is, 
as I told you above, " that they have formerly 
been doubted of;" but if you demand, why they 
do not, for the same reason, reject a great many 
more in the New Testament ? the whole Church 
of England answers you in Mr. Rogers' words, 
and by him, " Howbeit we judge them (viz., 
books formerly doubted of in the New Testa- 
ment) canonical, not so much because learned 
and godly men in the church so have, and do 
receive and allow of them, as for that the Holy 
Spirit in our hearts doth testify that they are 
from God." See Rogers' Defence of the Thirty- 
nine Articles, pages 31, 32. So that Protestants 
are purely beholden to the private spirit in the 
hearts of their convocation-men, for almost half 
the New Testament ; which had never been ad- 
mitted by them in the canon of scripture,if the said 
" private spirit in their hearts had not testified 
their being from God ;" no more than the rest 
called Apocrypha, which they not only thrust 
out of the canon, but omit to publish in their 
smaller impressions of the Bible ; because, 
forsooth, the holy private spirit in their hearts 
testifies them to speak too expressly against their 
heretical doctrines. 



70 



XVI. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon. an. 1683. 


Acts of 
the Apos. 
chap. ii. 
verse 27. 


Quoniarn non de- 
relinques " animam 
meam in inferno." 

1DB3, > ^"XM 


Because thou "wilt" 
not leave my " soul 
in hell." 


Thou " shalt" not 
leave my " carcase 
in the grave." — 
Beza. 

Thou wilt not 
leave my " soul in 
the grave." — (Bible 
1579.) (1) 


It is corrected in 
this translation. 


Genesis 
ch. xxxvii. 
verse 35 


Descendam ad fi- 
lium meum lugens in 
" infernum, " ^x®, 
dcdijg, infcrnus ; for 
so are the Hebrew, 
Greek, and Latin 
words for hell. (2) 


I will go down to 
my son into " hell " 
mourning. 


I will go down 
into " the grave un- 
to" my son mourn- 
ing.^) 


I will go down 
into the " grave." 


Genesis 
chap. xlii. 
verse 38. 


Deducetis canos 
meos cum dolore ad 
" inferos." 


You will bring 
down my grey hairs 
with sorrow unto 
" hell." 


Instead of" hell," 
they say " grave." 


For " hell," they 
also say, " grave." 


Genesis 
chap. xliv. 
verses 29, 
31. 


Deducetis canos 
meos cum mcerore ad 
" inferos." 


— With sorrow 
unto " hell." 


— With sorrow 
unto " the grave." 


— With sorrow 
unto the " grave." 


3 Kings 
chap. ii. 
verses 6, 9. 


— Ad " inferos." 


— Unto "hell." 


— " To the grave." 


— " To the grave." 



LIMBUS PATRUM 

The doctrine of our pretended reformers is, 
that " there was never, from the beginning of 
the world, any other place for souls, after this 
life, but only two, to wit, heaven for the blessed, 
and hell for the damned." This heretical doc- 
trine includes many erroneous branches : First, 
that all the holy patriarchs, prophets, and other 
holy men, of the Old Testament, went not into 
the third place, called Abraham's bosom, or 
limbiis patrum ; but immediately to heaven : 
that they were in heaven before our blessed Sa- 
viour had suffered death for their redemption ; 
whence it will follow, that our Saviour was not the 
first man that ascended, and entered into heaven. 
Moreover, by this doctrine it will follow, that 
our Saviour Christ descended not into any 
third place, in our creed called hell, to deliver 
the fathers of the Old Testament, and to bring 
them triumphantly with him into heaven : and 
so, that article of the Apostle's Creed, con- 
cerning our Saviour's descent into hell, must 
either be put out, as indeed it was by Beza in 
the confession of his faith, printed anno 1564, 
or it must have some other meaning ; to wit, 
either the lying of the body in the grave, or, as 
Calvin and his followers will have it, the suf- 
fering of hell torments, and pains upon the 
cross, (a) 



(1) In defence of these erroneous doctrines, 
they most wilfully corrupt the holy scriptures ; 
and especially Beza, who in his New Testament, 
printed by Robert Stephens, anno 1556, makes 
our Saviour Christ say thus to his Father, Non 
derelinques cadaver meum in sepvlchro ; for that 
which the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, and St. 
Hierom, according to the Hebrew, say, Non 
derelinques animam meam in inferno. Thus 
the prophet David speaks it in Hebrew : (b) 
thus the Septuagint uttered it in Greek : thus 
the apostle St. Peter alleges it : thus St. Luke 
in the Acts of the Apostles : and for this, St. 
Augustine calls him an infidel that denies it. 
Yet all this would not suffice to make Beza 
translate it so ; because, as he says, he would 
avoid ( certain errors, as he calls them ) the 
Catholic doctrine of limbus patrum and purga- 
tory. And therefore, because else it would 
make for the Papists' doctrine, he translates 
animam, carcase ; infcrnum, grave, (c) 



And though our English translators are 
ashamed of this foul and absurd corruption, yet 
their intention appears to come not much, if any 
thing at all, short of Beza's ; for, in their Bible 
of 1579, they have it in the text, " Thou wilt 
not leave my soul in the grave," and in the 
margin they put, " or life, or person ;" thereby 

(a) Calvin's Instit., lib. 2, c. 1G, sect. 10, and in his 
Catechism. 
(*) Psal. xv. 10. 

tc) See Beza's Annotat. in Act. ii. 



ND PURGATORY. 71 

advertising the reader, that if it please him, he 
may read thus, " Thou shalt not leave my life in 
the grave," or, " Thou shalt not leave my per- 
son in the grave :" as though either man's soul 
or life were in the grave, or anima might be 
translated person. I said, they were ashamed 
of Beza's translation ; but one would rather 
think, they purposely designed to make it worse, 
if possible. But you see the last translators 
have indeed been ashamed of it, and have cor- 
rected it. See you not now, what monstrous 
and absurd work our first pretended reformers 
made of the holy scriptures, on purpose to make 
it speak for their own terms 1 By their putting 
grave in the text, they design to make it a cer- 
tain and absolute conclusion, howsoever you 
interpret soul, that the holy scripture, in this 
place, speaks not of Christ's being in hell, but 
only in the grave ; and that according to his 
soul, life, or person ; or, as Beza says, his car- 
case. And so his " soul in hell," as the scrip- 
ture speaks, must be his carcase, soul, or life in 
the grave, with them. But St. Chrysostom 
says, (d) " He descended to hell, that the souls 
which were there bound, might be loosed." And 
the words of St. Irenaeus are equally plain : 
" During the three days he conversed where 
the dead were : as the prophecy says of him, he 
remembered his holy ones who were dead, those 
who before slept in the land of promise ; he 
descended to them, to fetch them out, and save 
them." (?) 



(2) How absurd also is this corruption of 
theirs, " I will go down into the grave unto my 
son 1" as though Jacob thought that his son 
Joseph had been buried in a grave ; whereas, a 
little before, he said, that some " wild beast 
had devoured him." But if they mean the state 
of all dead men, by grave, why do they call it 
grave, and not hell, as the word is in Hebrew, 
Greek, and Latin 1 But I must demand of our 
latter translators, why they did not correct this, 
as they have done the former, seeing the Hebrew, 
Greek, and Latin words are the same in both ? 
It cannot be through ignorance, I find : no, it 
must have been purely out of a design to make 
their ignorant readers believe, that the patri- 
arch Jacob spoke of his body only to descend 
into the grave to Joseph's body : for as con- 
cerning Jacob's soul, that, by their opinion, was 
to ascend immediately after his death into 
heaven, and not descend into the grave. But 
if Jacob were forthwith to ascend in soul, how 
could he say, as they translate, " I will go down 
into the grave, unto my son, mourning'?" as if, 
according to their opinion, he should say : " My 
son's body is devoured by a beast, and his soul 
is gone up to heaven :" well, " I will go down 
to him into the grave." 



(d) St. Chrys. in Eph. iv. 

(e) S. Irenaeus, lib. 5, fine. 



72 



XVI. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rheniish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
a. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683. 


Ps. Ixxxv. 
verse 13. 


Et eruisti animam 
me am ex " inferno 
inferiori" (1) 


Thou hast deli- 
vered my soul from 
the " lower hell." 


Thou hast deli- 
vered my soul from 
the " lowest grave." 
(I) 


Instead of "lower" 
hell, they say, "low- 
est" hell. 


Ps. Ixxxix. 

verse 49. 


Emit animam 
suam manu " in- 
fen ?" (2) 


Shall he deliver 
his soul from the 
hand of " hell ?" 


Shall he deliver 
his soul from the 
hand of the "grave?" 
(2) 


Shall he deliver 
his soul from the 
hand of the "grave?" 


Hosea 
chap. xiii. 
verse 14. 


Ero mors tua, 
mors, morsus tuus 
era " infer ne," fr&V. 


death, I will be 
thy death ; I will be 
thy sting, " hell." 


— "grave," I 
will be thy destruc- 
tion. 


death, I will be 
thy " plagues ;" O 
" grave," I will be 
thy destruction. 


1 Corinth, 
chap. xv. 
verse 55. 


Ubi est, mors, sti- 
mulus tuus? ubi est 
" inferne," victoria 
tua ? aSn. 


Where is, death, 
thy sting ? where is, 
"hell," thy vic- 
tory. 


death, where 
is thy sting? 
" grave," where is 
thy victory ? 


For "hell" they 
say, " grave." 


Psalm vi. 
verse 5. 


In "inferno" autem 
quis confitebitur tibi ? 


But in "hell," 
who shall confess to 
thee ? 


They say, " in the 
grave." 


In the " grave," 
who shall "give thee 
thanks ?" 


Proverbs 
uh. xxvii. 
verse 20. 


" Jnfernus" et per- 
ditio nunquam im- 
plentur. 


"Hell and de- 
struction are never 
full. 


" The grave" and 
destruction are ne- 
ver full. 


Corrected. 


Hebrews 
chap. v. 
verse 7. 


" Qui" in diebus 
carnis sum preces 
supplicationesque ad 
eum, qui possit ilium 
salvum faeere a 
morte, cum clamore 
valido et lachrymis 
offerens, exauditus 
est 6t pro sua reve- 
renlia," dnd ttj; ivla. 
Pelag. (3) 


"Who" in the 
days of his flesh, 
with a strong cry 
and tears, offering 
prayers and suppli- 
cations to him that 
could save him from 
death, was heard 
" for his reverence." 


" Which" in days 
of his flesh, "offered 
up" prayers, with 
strong " crying, un- 
to" him that " was 
able to" save him 
from death, " and" 
was heard, " in that 
which he feared." 
(3) 


"Who" in the 
days, &c, " and 
was heard in that he 
feared." 



LIMBUS PATRU M 

(1) Understand, good reader, that in the Old 
Testament none ascended into heaven. " This 
way of the holies," as the apostle says, " being 
not yet made open ;" (a) because our Saviour 
Christ himself was to " dedicate that new and 
living way," and begin the entrance in his own 
person, and by his passion to open heaven ; for 
none but he was found worthy to open the 
seals, and to read the book. Therefore, as I 
said before, the common phrase of the holy 
scriptures, in the Old Testament, is, even of the 
best of men, as well as others, that dying, they 
went down, ad inferos, or ad infernum ; that is, 
descended not to the grave, which received their 
bodies only ; but ad inferos, " into hell," a com- 
mon receptacle for their souls. 



So we say in our creed, that our Saviour 
Christ himself descended into hell, according 
to his soul. So St. Hierom, speaking of the 
state of the Old Testament, (b) says, " If 
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were in hell, who 
was in the kingdom of heaven ?" and again, 
" Before the coming of Christ, Abraham was in 
hell ; after his coining, the thief was in paradise." 
And lest it might be objected, that Lazarus 
being in Abraham's bosom, saw the rich glutton 
afar off in hell : and that therefore both Abra- 
ham and Lazarus seem to have been in heaven, 
the same holy doctor resolves it, that Abraham 
and Lazarus also were in hell, but in a place of 
great rest and refreshing ; and therefore very 
far off* from the miserable wretched glutton, 
that lay in torments, which is also agreeable to 
St. Augustine's interpretation of this place, (c) 
in the Psalm, " Thou hast delivered my soul 
from the lower hell," who makes this sense of it, 
that the lower hell is the place wherein the 
damned are tormented ; the higher hell is that 
wherein the souls of the just rested, calling both 
places by the name of hell. To avoid this dis- 
tinction of the inferior and higher hell, our first 
translators, instead of lower hell, rendered it 
lowest grave ; which they would not for shame 
have done, had they not been afraid to say in 
any place of scripture (how plain soever) that 
any soul was delivered or returned from hell, 
lest it might then follow, that the patriarchs 
and our Saviour Christ were in such a hell ; 
and though the last translation has restored the 
word hell in this place ; yet so loath were our 
translators to hear the scripture speak of limbus 
patrum or purgatory, that they still retained 
the superlative lowest, lest the comparative 
lower (which is the true translation) might seem 
more clearly to evince this distinction between 
the superior and inferior hell ; though they 
could not at the same time be ignorant of this 



(a) Heb. ix. 8; x. 20. 

(i) Epitaph. Nepot. cap. 3. 

(c) St. Aug. in Ps. Ixxxv. 13. 



AND PURGATORY. 73 

sentence of Tertullian : I know that the bosom 
of Abraham was no heavenly place, but only the 
higher hell, or the higher part of hell." (d) Nor 
can I believe, but they must have read these words 
in St. Chrysostom, upon that place of Esai : " I 
will break the brazen gates, and bruise the iron 
bars in pieces, and will open the treasure dark- 
ened," <fcc So he (the prophet) calls hell, says 
he ; " for although it were hell, yet it held the 
holy souls, and precious vessels, Abraham, 
Isaac, and Jacob." (e) 



(2) And thus all along, wherever they find 
the word hell, that is, where it signifies the 
place in which the holy fathers of the Old 
Testament rested, called by the church limbus 
patrum, they are sure to translate it grave ; a 
word as much contrary to the signification of 
the Greek, Hebrew, or Latin words, as bread is 
to the Latin word lac. If I ask them, what is 
Hebrew, Greek, or Latin for hell, must they 
not tell me, 'Srjg, infernus ? If I ask them, 
what words they will bring from those languages 
to signify grave, must they not say, ^P, i&yog, 
sepulchrum ? With what face then can they look 
upon these wilful corruptions of theirs ? 



(3) Note here another most damnable corrup- 
tion of theirs ; instead of translating as all anti- 
quity, with a general and full consent, has ever 
done in this place, " that Christ was heard of his 
Father, for his reverence ;" they read, " that 
he was heard in that which he feared ;" or, as 
this last Bible has it, " and was heard in that he 
feared." And who taught them this sense of 
the text 1 Doubtless Beza ; whom, for the most 
part, they follow ; and he had it from Calvin, 
who, he says, was the first that ever found out 
this interpretation. And why did Calvin invent 
this, but to defend his blasphemous doctrine, 
" that our Saviour Jesus Christ, upon the cross, 
was horribly afraid of damnation : and that he 
was in the very sorrows and torments of the 
damned : and that this was his descending into 
hell : and that otherwise he descended not." 
Note this, good reader, and then judge to what 
wicked end this translation tends. Who has 
ever heard of greater blasphemy ; and yet they 
dare presume to force the scripture, by their 
false translation, to back them in it ; " he was 
heard in that which he feared ;" as if they should 
say, he was delivered from damnation, and the 
eternal pains of hell, of which he was sore 
afraid. What dare they not do, who tremble not 
at this 1 



(d) Tertul. 1, 4, adversus Marcion. 

(e) St. Chrysost. Horn, quod Christus sit Deus, to. 5. 



74 



XVII. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 

Chapter, 
and Verse. 



Romans 
chap. ii. 
verse 26. 



St. Luke 
chap. i. 
verse 6. 



Apocalyp. 
chap. xix. 
verse 8. 



2 Timoth. 
chap. iv. 
verse 8. 



2 Thessal. 
chap. i. 
verses 5, 6. 



Hebrews 
chap. vi. 
verse 10, 



The Vulgate Latin Text. 



Si igitur prceputium 
"justitias," dixaiu- 
[xaraJegis custodial, 
Sfc. (1) 



Erant autem "justi," 
dixuiol, ambo ante 
Dcum, incedentes in 
omnibus mandatis el 
" justifcationibus, " 
xai dixuiwfiaai, Domi- 
ni sine querela. 



Byssinum enim 
"justtficationes^sunt 
sanctorum,ru dixutw- 
(ittTa. 



In reliquo, reposita 
est mihi,corona il jus- 
titias," irjg Sixtxioov- 
vrjs,quam reddet mihi 
Dominus in ilia die 
"juslus" judex, 6 
Sixaiog XQtrrjg andw- 
oasi, 6fC. (2) 



— In exemplum 
" justi," dixaiag, ju- 
dicii Dei, ut digni 
habeamini in regno 
Dei, pro quo el 
patiamini, si tamen 
justum est, dixuivov 
eqi,apud Deum,retri- 
buere tribulationem 
Us qui vos tribulant. 



Non enim " injus- 
tus," adcxog, Deus, 
ut obliviscatur operis 
vestri, <Sfc. 



The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 



If then the pre- 
puce keep the "jus- 
tices" of the law,&c. 



And they were 
both "just" before 
God, walking in all 
the commandments 
and "justifications" 
of our Lord, without 
blame. 



For the silk are 
the "justifications" 
of saints. 



Concerning the 
rest, there is laid 
up for me a crown 
of "justice," which 
our Lord will ren- 
der to me in that 
day, a just Judge. 



For an example 
of the "just" judg- 
ment of God, that 
you may be counted 
worthy of the king- 
dom of God, for 
which you suffer, 
that yet it be "just" 
with God to repay 
tribulations to them 
that vex you, and 
to you that are vex- 
ed, rest with us, &c. 



For God is not 
"unjust," that he 
should forget your 
works, &c. 



Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
a. d. 1562, 1577, 1579. 



If the uncircum- 
cision keep the "or- 
dinances"of the law. 
(1) 



And they were 
both "righteous" be- 
fore God, walking 
in all the command- 
ments and " ordi- 
nances" of the Lord 
blameless. 



For the "fine linen" 
are the " righteous- 
ness" of saints. 



Henceforth there 
is laid up for me a 
crown of righteous- 
ness," which the 
Lord the " righte- 
ous"Judge shall give 
me, &c. (2) 



Rejoice, &c 

which is a token 
of the " righteous" 
judgment of God, 
that you may be 
counted worthy of 
the kingdom of God, 
for which ye suffer. 
For it is a " righte- 
ous"thing with God, 
to recompence tri- 
bulation to them 
that trouble you, and 
to you that are 
troubled, rest. 



God is not " un- 
righteous" to forget 
your good works 
and labour. 



The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon. an. 1683. 



If therefore the 
uncircumcision keep 
the "righteousness" 
of the law. 



And they were 
both "righteous" be- 
fore God, walking 
in all the command- 
ments and " ordi- 
nances" of the Lord 
blameless. 



For the " fine 
linen" is the " righ- 
teousness" of saints 



For " justice, " 
they translate "righ- 
teousness :" and for 
a "just" judge, they 
say a " righteous" 
judge. 



Here also they say 
" righteous" judg- 
ment, and " righ- 
teous thing," instead 
of "just," &c. 



For God is not 
" unrighteous," &c. 



JUSTIFICATION, AND THE 



REWARD OF GOOD WORKS. 



75 



(1) As the article of justification has many 
branches, and as their errors therein are mani- 
fold, so are their English translations accord- 
ingly in many respects false and heretical : first, 
against justification by good works, and by 
keeping the commandments, they suppress the 
very name of justification in all such places 
where the word signifies the commandments, 
or the law of God ; and where the Greek signi- 
fies most exactly justices and justifications, 
according as our Vulgate Latin translates, 
justit.ias and justificationes, there the English 
translators say, statutes or ordinances ; as you 
see in these examples, where their last transla- 
tion, because they would seem to be doing, 
though to small purpose, changes the first cor- 
ruption, " ordinances of the law," into righ- 
teousness ; another word, as far from what it 
should have been, in comparison, as the first : 
and to what end is all this, but to avoid the 
term justifications ? they cannot be ignorant how 
different this is from the Greek, which they 
pretend to translate. In the Old Testament, 
perhaps they will pretend that they follow the 
Hebrew word, which is D^pn ; and therefore, they 
translate statutes and ordinances ; (righteousness 
too, if they please ;) but even there also, are not 
the seventy Greek interpreters sufficient to 
teach them the signification of the Hebrew 
word, who always interpret it, dixaiufiara ; in 
English, justifications 1 



But admit that they may control the Septua- 
gint in the Hebrew ; yet in the New Testament 
they do not pretend to translate the Hebrew, 
but rather the Greek. What reason have they 
then for rejecting the word just and justifica- 
tions 1 Surely, no other reason, but that which 
their master Beza gives for the same thing ; 
saying, that " he rejected the word justificationes, 
on purpose to avoid the cavils that might be 
made from this word, against justification by 
faith. "(a) As if he should say, this word, 
truly translated according to the Greek, might 
minister great occasion to prove, by so many 
places of scripture, that man's justification is not 
by faith only, but also by keeping the law, and 
observing the commandments of God ; which, 
therefore, are called according to the Greek 
and Latin, justificationes, because they concur 
to justification, and making a man just : as by 
St. Luke's words, also, is well signified ; which 
have this allusion, that they were both just, be- 
cause they walked in all the justifications of our 
Lord ; which they designedly suppress by other 
words. 



(2) And hereof it also rises, that when Beza 



(a) Beza Annot. in Luk. i. 



could not possibly avoid the word in his transla- 
tion, Apoc. xix. 8, " the silk is the justification of 
saints ;" he helps the matter with this commenta- 
ry, " That justifications are those good works, 
which are the testimony of a lively faith."(5) 
But our English translators have found another, 
way to avoid the word, even in their transla- 
tions : for they, because they could not say 
ordinances, translate, " the righteousness of 
saints ;" abhorring the word "justifications of 
saints ;" because they know full well, that this 
word includes the good works of saints : which 
works, if they should in translating, call their 
justifications, it would rise up against their " jus- 
tifications by faith only :" therefore, where they 
cannot translate ordinances and statutes, which 
are terms farthest off from justification, they 
say, righteousness, making it also the plural 
number ; whereas the more proper Greek word 
for righteousness is svdvTtjg, (Dan. vi. 22,) which 
there some of them translate, unguiltiness, 
because they will not translate exactly if you 
would hire them. 



And by their translating righteous, instead of 
just, they bring it, that Joseph was a righteous 
man, rather than a just man ; and Zachary and 
Elizabeth were both righteous before God, 
rather than just ; because when a man is 
called just, it sounds that he is so indeed, and 
not by imputation only. Note also, that where 
faith is joined with the word just, they omit 
not to translate it just, " the just shall live by 
faith," to signify, that "justification is by faith 
alone. "(c) 



(3) These places, (2 Tim., 2 Thess., and 
Heb.) do very fairly discover their false and 
corrupt intentions, in concealing the word jus- 
tice in all their Bibles ; for, if they should 
translate truly, as they ought to do, it would 
infer, (d) that men are justly crowned in heaven 
for their good works upon earth, and it is God's 
justice so to do ; and that he will do so, because 
he is a just Judge, and because he will show 
his just judgment ; and he will not forget so to 
do, because he is notunjust; as the ancient fathers 
do interpret and expound. St. Augustine most 
excellently declares, that it is God's grace, 
favour, and mercy in making us, by his grace, 
to live and believe well, and so to be worthy of 
heaven ; and his justice and just judgment, 
to render and repay eternal life for those works 
which himself wrought in us : which he thus 
expresses, " How should he render or repay 
as a just judge, unless he had given it as a mer- 
ciful Father V (e) 



(b) Beza Annot. in Apoc. xix. 
(e) Rom. i. 

(d) St. Chrys. Theodoret, Oecumen. upon these places. 

(e) St. Aug. de Gra. et lib. Arbitr., cap. 6. 



76 XVIII. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Biules, printed 
A. i). 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon. an. 1683. 


Romans 
chap. viii. 
verse 18. 


"Existimo" Xoyl'Cfl- 
fiott, enim quod non 
sunt "condi&ruB vas- 
siones lutjus tempo- 
ris ad futuram glo- 
riam, dfC, tsx a^ia 
riQng rijv fielXyaav 
do^uy. (1) 


For " I think" 
that the " passions" 
of this time are not 
" condign to" the 
glory to come, that 
shall be revealed in 
us. 


For I am " cer- 
tainly persuaded," 
that the "afflictions" 
of this time are not 
" worthy of" the 
glory which shall be 
in us. (1) 


For " I reckon" 
that the sufferings 
of this present time, 
are not " worthy to 
be compared with" 
the glory which shall 
be revealed in us. 


Hebrews 
chap. x. 
verse 29. 


Quanto magis pu- 
tatis " deteriora me- 
reri,supplieia" noooi 

uftogiag, qui Filium 
Dei conculcaverit, 
fc. (2) 


How much more, 
think you, doth 
he " deserve worse 
punishments," who 
hath trodden the 
Son of God under- 
foot ? 


How much "sorer 
shall he be punish- 
ed," which treadeth 
under-foot the Son 
of God ? (2) 


Of how much 
"sorer punishment," 
suppose ye, shall he 
be thought " wor- 
thy" who hath trod- 
den under-foot the 
Son of God. 


Coloss. 
chap. i. 
verse 12. 


Gratia s agentes 
Deo Palri, qui " dig- 

710S," lxavtx)OtxVTi : n0S 

fecit in partem "sor- 
tis" sanctorum in lu- 
mine. (3) 


Giving thanks to 
God the Father, 
who hath made us 
" worthy" unto the 
part of the " lot" of 
the saints in the 
light. 


Giving thanks to 
God the Father, 
" that" hath made 
us " meet to be par- 
takers" of the " in- 
heritance" of the 
saints in light. (3) 


Giving thanks un- 
to the Father that 
hath made us"meet," 
&c. 


Ps. cxviii. 
verse 112. 


" Inclinavi " cor 
meum ad faciendas 
" justijicaliones tuas 
in etcrnum, propter 
retributionem" (4) 


I have " inclined" 
my heart to do thy 
" justifications for 
ever for reward." 


I have " applied" 
my heart to fulfil 
thy "statutes always 
even unto the end." 
(4) 


— " Even unto the 
end." 


Hebrews 
chap. ii. 
verse 9. 


Eum autem qui 
modico quam angeli 
" minoratus est" vi- 
demus Jesum, prop- 
ter u passionem" mor- 
tis gloria el honore 
coronatum. (5) 


But him that was 
a little " lessened 
under" the angels, 
we see Jesus, be- 
cause of the " pas- 
sion"of death,crown- 
ed with glory and 
honour. 


We see Jesus 
crowned with glory 
and honour," which" 
was a " little infe- 
rior to" the angels, 
" through" the "suf- 
fering" of death. 
(5) 


But we see Jesus, 
who was made a 
" little lower than" 
the angels, for the 
" suffering" of death 
crowned with glory 
and honour. 



MERITS, AND JIER 

(1) 1 shall not say much of this gross cor- 
ruption, because they have been pleased to correct 
it in their last translation : nor will I dwell on 
their first words, " I am certainly persuaded," 
which is a far greater asseveration than the 
apostle uses ; I wonder how they could thus 
translate that Greek word ltyl$o/nai ; but that 
they were resolved nor only to translate the 
apostle's words falsely, against meritorious 
works, but also to avouch and affirm the same 
forcibly. And for the words following, they 
are not in Greek, as they translate in their first 
English Bibles, " the afflictions are not worthy 
of the glory," &c, because they will not have 
our suffering here, though for Christ's sake, to 
merit eternal glory ; but thus, " The afflictions 
of this time, are not equal, correspondent, or 
comparable to the glory to come," because they 
are short, but the glory is eternal ; the afflic- 
tions are small and few, in comparison ; the 
glory great and abundant, above measure. By 
this the apostle would encourage us to suffer ; 
as he does also in another place very plainly, 
when he says, " Our tribulation which presently 
is for a moment and light, worketh (' prepareth,' 
says their Bible, 1577, with a very false mea- 
ning) above measure exceedingly, an eternal 
weight of glory in us." See you not here, that 
short tribulation in this life " works," that is 
causes, purchases, and deserves an eternal 
weight of glory in the next ? And what is that, 
but to be meritorious, and worthy of the same ? 
As St. Cyprian says, (a) " what manner of 
day shall come, my brethren, when our Lord 
shall recount the merits of every one, and pay 
us the reward, or stipend of faith and devotion !" 
Here you see are merits, and the reward for the 
same. Likewise St. Augustine : (b) " The ex- 
ceeding goodness of God has provided this, 
that the labours should soon be ended, but the 
rewards of the merit shall endure without end ; 
the apostle testifying, the passions of this time 
are not comparable," &c. " For we shall re- 
ceive greater bliss, than are the afflictions of all 
passions whatsoever." 

(2) How deceitfully they deal with the scripture 
in this place ! One of their Bibles (c) very falsely 
and corruptly leaving out the words " worthy 
of," or " deserve," saying, " How much sorer 
shall he be punished V &c. And the last of 
their translations adding as falsely to the text 
the word " thought :'" " How much sorer pun- 
ishment shall he be thought worthy of," &c. ; 
and this is done to avoid this consequence, which 
must have followed by translating the Greek 
word sincerely ; to wit, if the Greek here, by 
there own translation, signifies " to be worthy 
of," or " to deserve," being spoken of pains or 
punishments deserved ; then must they grant 
us the same word to signify the same thing 
elsewhere in the New Testament, when it is 
spoken of deserving Heaven, and the kingdom 

(a) St. Cyprian, Ep. 56, v. 3. 

(b) St. August. Serm. 57, de Sanct. 

(c) Bible of 1562. 

11 



ITORIOUS WORKS. 77 

of God, as in Luke, xx., xxi., where, if they 
translate according to the Greek, which they 
pretend to, they should say, "may be worthy," 
and " they that are worthy ;" and not according 
to the "Vulgate Latin, which I see, they are 
willing to follow, when they think it may make 
the more for their turn. 



(3) The Greek word Ixavihaai, they translate to 
make " meet" in this place, but in other places 
(viz. Mat. iii. 8, 11, and viii. 8,) they translate 
Ixavbg, " worthy." And why could they not 
follow the old Latin interpreter one step further ? 
seeing this was the place where they should have 
showed their sincerity, and have said, that God 
made us " worthy" of heavenly bliss ; because 
they cannot but know, that if lxou>bg,be "worthy," 
then Ixavcdoai must needs be " to make worthy." 
But they follow their old master, Beza, (d) who 
tells them, that here, and there, and soforth, 
I have followed the old Latin interpreter, trans- 
lating it " worthy," but in such and such a place 
(meaning this for one) I choose rather to say 
" meet." What presumption is here ! The 
Greek fathers interpret it " worthy." St. Chry- 
sostom, upon this place, says, (e) " God doth 
not only give us society with the saints, but 
makes us also worthy to receive so great a dig- 
nity." And GScumenius says : that " it is God's 
glory to make his servants worthy of such good 
things : and that it is their glory to be made 
worthy of such things." (f) 

(4) Here is yet another most notorious cor- 
ruption against " merits :" " I have applied my 
heart to fulfil thy statues, always, even unto the 
end ;" and for their evasion here, they fly to the 
ambiguity of the Hebrew word spf, as if the 
seventy interpreters were not sufficient to de- 
termine the same ; but because they find it am- 
biguous, they are resolved to take their liberty, 
though contrary to St. Hierom, and the ancient 
fathers, both Greek and Latin. 

(5) In fine, so obstinately are they set against 
merits, and meritorious works, that some of 
them think, (g) that even Christ himself did not 
merit his own glory and exaltation : for making 
out of which error, I suppose, they have trans- 
posed the words of this text, thereby making 
the apostle say, that Christ was inferior to 
angels by his suffering death ; that is, says Beza, 
*' for to suffer death ;" by which they quite ex- 
clude the true sense, that, " for suffering death, 
he was crowned with glory ;" which are the 
true words and meaning of the apostle. But in 
their last translations they so place the words, 
that they will have it left so ambiguous, as you 
may follow which sense you will. Intolerable 
is their deceit ! 



(d) Beza Annot. in Matth. iii. Nov. Test. 1556. 

(e) Oecum. in Caten. 

(/) St. Bazil. in Orat. Litur. 

ig) See Calvin, in Epist. ad Philip. 



78 XIX. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bihles, printed 
a. d. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683. 


St. John 
chap. i. 
verse 12. 




Quotquot autem 
receperunt eum, de- 
dit eis " potestatcm" 
tEaolav, Jilios Dei 
fieri. (1) 


But as many as 
received him, he 
gave them " power" 
to be made the 
sons of God. 


But as many as 
received him, he 
gave them " prero- 
gative" (" Dignity," 
says Beza) to be the 
sons of God. (1) 


Corrected. 


1 Corinth, 
chap. xv. 
verse 10. 


— Sed abundan- 
tius illis omnibus la- 
bnravi : non ego au- 
tem, sed gratia Dei 
" mecum," i) %6(>iZ ru 
@s2 17 ovv i/joi. (2) 


— But I have la- 
boured more abun- 
dantly than all they; 
yet not I, but the 
grace of God " with 
me." 


— Yet not I, 
but the grace of 
God " which is" 
with me. (2) 


— Yet not I, but 
the grace of God 
" which was" with 
me. 


Ephesians 
chap. iii. 
verse 12. 


In quo habemus 
" fiduciam" et " ac- 
cessum" in confiden- 
tia per fidem ejus. 
(3) 


In whom we have 
" affiance" and " ac- 
cess" in confidence, 
by the faith of him. 


"By" whom we 
have "boldness" and 
"entrance, with the" 
confidence " which 
is" by the faith of 
him ; or " in him," 
as Beza has it. (3) 


Corrected. 


2 Corinth, 
chap. vi. 
verse 1. 


" Adjuvanles," ov- 
vBqyovvtBi,aulem ex- 
hortamur, ne in va- 
cuum gratiam Dei 
recipiatis. (4) 


And " we help- 
ing," do exhort, that 
you receive not the 
grace of God in 
vain. 


And we " God's 
labourers," &c. In 
another Bible, We 
" together are God's 
labourers." (4) 


Corrected. 


Romans 
chap. v. 
verse 6. 


TJt quid cnim 
Christus, cum adhuc 
" infirmi essemus," 

secundum tempus pro 
"impiis" mortuus 
est. (5) 


For, why did 
Christ, when we as 
yet " were weak," 
according to the 
time, die for the 
" impious-" 


Christ, when we 
were yet of " no 
strength," died for 
the " ungodly." (5) 


For when we 
were yet " without 
strength," in due 
time Christ died for 
the " ungodly." 


1 Ep. John 
chap. v. 
verse 3. 


Hcec est enim 
charitas Dei, ut 
mandata ejus cuslo- 
diamus : et mandata 
ejus " gravia" non 
sunt, at ivToXal @u- 
qeiat isx elalv. (6) 


For this is the 
charity of God, that 
we keep his com- 
mandments : and his 
commandments are 
not " heavy." 


— And his com- 
mandments are not 
" grievous." (6) 


— Instead of, his 
commandments are 
not " heavy," they 
say, are not " grie- 
vous." 


St. Matth. 
chap. xix. 
verse 11. 


(Dim niy^it t //? c 

' 1 ( lit ttrlCO, 

" non omnes capiunt, 
& n&viEg xojqhoi, ver- 
bum istud, sed qui- 
bus datum est. (7) 


ATI men 6< rlo 

not" receive this 
saying. 


All mpn " ran. 

not" receive this 
saying. (7) 


All men " can- 

- 1 11 111 1 — 11 V»H 

not" receive this 
saying. 



FREE 

(1) Against free will, instead of power, 
they, in their translation, use the word preroga- 
tive ; and Beza, the word dignity ; protesting 
(a) that whereas, in other places, he often trans- 
lated this Greek word, power and authority, 
here he rejected both indeed against free will ; 
which, he says, the sophists would prove out of 
this place, reprehending Erasmus for following 
them in his translation. But whereas the Greek 
word is indifferently used to signify dignity or 
liberty, he that will translate either of these, and 
exclude the other, restrains the sense of the 
Holy Ghost, and determines it to his own fancy. 
Now we may as well translate liberty, as Beza 
does dignity ; but we must not abridge the sense 
of the Holy Ghost to one particular meaning, 
and therefore we translate potestas and power, 
words indifferently signifying both dignity and 
liberty. But in their last Bible it is corrected. 
It would have been well, if they had corrected 
this next, though I think of the two, they have 
made it worse; translating, "not I, but the 
grace of God which was with me," (" which is 
with me,) say their old Bibles." 

(2) By which falsity, they here also restrain 
the sense of the Holy Ghost ; whereas, if they 
had translated according to sincerity, " Yet 
not I, but the grace of God with me," the text 
might have had not only the sense they confine 
it to, but also this, "not I, but the grace of 
God which laboured with me." So that, by this 
latter, it may be evidently signified, that the 
grace of God, and the apostle, both laboured 
together ; and not only grace, as if the apostle 
had done nothing, like unto a block, or forced 
only ; but that the grace of God did so concur, 
as the principal agent, with all his labours, that 
his free will wrought with it : and this is the 
most approved interpretation of this place, 
which their translation, by putting, " which is," 
or, " which was," into the text, excludes. 

But they reprehend the Vulgate Latin inter- 
preter for neglecting the Greek article, not con- 
sidering that the same many times cannot be 
expressed in Latin ; the Greek phrase having this 
prerogative above the Latin, to represent a thing 
more briefly, commodiously, and significantly 
by the article, as Jacobus Zvbedtei, Jacobus 
Alphai, Judas Jacobi, Maria Cleophm : in all 
which, though the Greek article is not expressed, 
yet they are all sincerely translated into Latin. 
Nor can the article be expressed without adding 
more than the article, and so not without adding 
to the text, as they do very boldly in such 
speeches, throughout the New Testament. 
Yea, they do it when there is no article in the 
Greek, and that purposely : as in this of the 
Ephesians, (3) where they say, " Confidence is 
by faith," as though there were no " confidence by 
works." The Greek, svnsnoidrjosi dux ryg mqtwi, 
bears not that translation, unless there were an 
article after confidence, which is not ; but they 
add it to the text : as also Beza does the like, in 
Rom. viii. 2, and their English Geneva Testa- 
fa) Beza Nov. Test. 1580. 



will. 79 

ments after him, to maintain the heresy of im- 
putative justice : as in his annotations he plainly 
deduces, saying confidently, " I doubt not, but 
a Greek article must be understood ;" and 
therefore, forsooth, put into the text also. He 
does the same in St. James ii. 20, still debating 
the case in his annotations, why he does so ; and 
when he has concluded in his fancy, that this or 
that is the sense, he puts it so in the text, and 
translates accordingly. But if they say, that in 
this place of the Corinthians there is a Greek 
article, and therefore they do well to express it : 
I answer, first, the article may then be expressed 
in translation, when there can be but one sense 
of the same. Secondly, it must be expressed, 
when we cannot otherwise give the sense of the 
place, as Mat. i. 6- sy. Ttjg ts 'Ovgle, Ex ea qum 
fuit Uricc, where the Vulgate interpreter omits 
it not ; but in this of St. Paul, which we now 
speak of, where the sense is doubtful, and the 
Latin expresses the Greek sufficiently otherwise, 
he leaves it also doubtful and indifferent, not 
abridging it, as they do, saying, " the grace of 
God which is with me." 

(4) Again, in this other place of the Corin- 
thians, where the apostle calls himself and his 
fellow preachers, " God's co-adjutors, co-la- 
bourers," or such as labour and work with God, 
how falsely have their first translators made it, 
let themselves, who have corrected it in their 
last Bible, judge. 

(5) And in this next, the apostle's words do 
not signify, that " we had no strength," or, 
" were without strength ;" but that we were 
" weak, feeble, infirm:" and this they corrupt to 
defend their false doctrine, " that free will was 
altogether lost by Adam's sin." (b) (c) 

(6) When they have bereaved and spoiled a 
man of his free-will, and left him without all 
strength, they go so far in this point, that they 
say, the regenerate themselves have no free will 
and ability ; no, not by and with the grace of 
God, to keep the commandment. To this pur- 
pose, they translate, his commandments are not 
" grievous," rather than " are not heavy ;" for 
in saying, " they are not heavy," it would follow, 
they might be kept and observed ; but in saying 
" they are not grievous," that may be true, were 
they never so heavy or impossible, through pa- 
tience ; as when a man cannot do as he would ; 
yet it grieves him not, being patient and wise, 
because he is content to do as he can, and is 
able. 

(7) Our Saviour says not in this place of St. 
Matthew, as they falsely translate, " All men 
cannot," but, " All men do not ;" and therefore, 
St. Augustine says, " Because all will not." (d) 
But when our Saviour says afterwards, " He 
that can receive, let him receive :" he adds 
another Greek word to express that sense, 
6 dwapEvog ^wostv ^woe^m whereas by the Pro- 
testant translation, he might have said, 6 xwgwv 
X<tiQEuij). Vide above. 

(b) Whitaker, p. 18. 

(c) See Beza's Annot, in Rom. ii. 27. 

(rf) St. August, de Gra. et lib. Arbitr. cap. 4. 



80 



XX. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhetnish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro 
testant Bibles, printed 
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon. an. 1683. 


Romans 
chap. v. 
verse 18. 


" Igitur" sicut per 
unius delictum in 
omnes homines in 
condemnationsm : sic 
et per unius justitiam 
in omnes homines in 
justijicationem vita. 
(1) 


Therefore, as by 
the offence of one, 
unto all men to con- 
demnation : so also 
by the "justice" of 
one, unto all men to 
justification of life. 


" Likewise then," 
as by the offence of 
one, " the fault 
came on" all men 
to condemnation : so 
by the " justifying" 
of one " the benefit 
aboundeth towards" 
all men, to " the" 
justification of life. 
(1) 


Therefore, as by 
the off ences of one, 
"judgment came up- 
on" all men to con- 
demnation : even so 
by the " righteous- 
ness of of one,"the 
free gift came upon" 
all men unto justifi- 
cation of life. 


Romans 
chap. iv. 
verse 3. 


Credidit Abraham 
Deo, et rcputatum 
est illi u ad justitiam" 
etg dixaiooui'qv . (2) 


Abraham believed 
God, and it was re- 
puted him " to jus- 
tice." 


Abraham believed 
God, and it was re- 
puted to him " for 
justice." (2) 


And it was ac- 
counted unto him 
"for righteousness." 


2 Corinth, 
chap. v. 
ver. ult. 


— Ut nos ejjice- 
remur " justitia" Dei 
ipso, Stxixioavpj] 0B& 
sf avj(p. (3) 


— That we might 
be made the "jus- 
tice" of God in him. 


That we " by his 
means" should be 
" that righteousness 
which before" God 
" is allowed." (3) 


That we might be 
made the " righte- 
ousness" of God in 
him. 


Ephesians - 
chap. i. 
verse 6. 


In qua " gratifi- 
caviLexocgiTuosv, nos 
in ailecto jilio suo. 
(4) 


Wherein he hath 
" gratified us" in his 
beloved Son. 


Wherein he hath 
"made us accepted," 
(or " freely accep- 
ted") in his beloved 
Son. (4) 


Wherein he hath 
made us "accepted" 
in the Beloved. 


Daniel 
chap. vi. 
verse 22. 


— Quia coram eo 
"justitia inventa est 
in me." (5) 


— Because before 
him "justice was 
found in me." 


Because before 
him, " my justice 
was found out." (5) 


Forasmuch as be- 
fore him"innocency 
was found in me." 


Romans 
chap. iv. 
verse 6. 


Sicut el David 
dicit, Isyel, beatitu- 
dinem hominis cui 

justitiam sine operi- 
bus, (6) 


As David also 
"termeth" the bless- 
edness of a man, "to 

wlinm'' (rnn lt rpnu. 

VV J 1 ( J i 1 1 VJUU 1CUU" 

teth justice" with 
out works. 


As David " de- 
scribeth" the bless- 
ednessof "the" man, 
" Tintn whom" Ood 
" imputeth righte- 
ousness." (6) 


Instead of " ter- 
meth" they say,"de- 
scribeth ;" and for 

" righteousness." 



INHERENT 

(1) Beza, in his annotations on Rom. v. 18, 
protests, that his adding to this text is especially 
against inherent justice, which, he says, is to be 
avoided as nothing more. His false translation 
you see our English Bibles follow ; and have 
added no fewer than six words in this one verse ; 
yea, their last translations have added seven, and 
some of these words much different from those 
of their former brethren ; so that it is impossible 
to make them agree betwixt themselves. I 
cannot but admire to see how loath they are to 
suffer the holy scripture to speak in behalf of 
inherent justice. 



(2) So also in this next place, where they add 
the word " for" to the text, " and it was reputed 
to him for justice," for " righteousness," says 
their last righteous work ; for the longer they 
live, the further they are divided from justice ; 
because they would have it to be nothing else, 
but instead and place of justice : thereby taking 
away true inherent justice, even in Abraham 
himself. But admit this translation of theirs, 
which, notwithstanding in their sense, is false, 
must it needs signify not true inherent justice, 
because the scripture says, it was reputed for 
justice ? Do such speeches import, that it is not so 
indeed, but is only reputed so? Then if we should 
say, this shall be reputed to thee " for" sin, "for" 
a great benefit, &c, it should signify it is no sin 
indeed, nor great benefit. But let them remem- 
ber, that the scripture uses to speak of sin and 
of justice alike, reputabitur tibi in peccatum, 
" It shall be reputed to thee for sin," as St. 
Hierom translates it. (a) If then justice only 
be reputed, sin also is only reputed : if sin be in 
us indeed, justice is in us indeed. And the 
Greek fathers make it plain, that " to be re- 
puted unto justice," is to have true justice indeed ; 
interpreting St. Paul's words, that " Abraham 
obtained justice," " Abraham was justified ;" for 
that is, say they, " It was reputed him to justice-" 
And St. James testifies, that " In that Abraham 
was justified by faith and works, the scripture 
was fulfilled," which says, " It was reputed him 
to justice," Gen. xv. 6, in which words of 
Genesis there is not " for justice," or " instead 
of justice," as the English Bibles have it, for the 
Hebrew npi? ii> i-dot should not be so trans- 
lated, especially when they meant it was so 
counted or reputed for justice, that it was not 
justice indeed. 



(3) Again, how intolerably have their first 
translations corrupted St. Paul's words, 2 
Cor. v., which though their latter Bibles have 
undertaken to correct, yet their heresy would 
not suffer them to amend also the word 



(a) Deut., xxiii. andxxiv.; CEcum. in Caten. Photius, 
chap. ii. ver. 23. 



JUSTICE. 81 

" righteousness !" It is death to them to hear 
of justice. 

(4) Here again they make St. Paul say, that 
God made us " accepted," or " freely accepted in 
his beloved Son," (their last translation leaves out 
Son very boldly, changing the word his into the, 
" accepted in the Beloved,") as if they had a mind 
to say, that " in, or among all the beloved in 
the world, God has only accepted us :" as they 
make the angel in St. Luke say to our blessed 
Lady, " Hail ! freely beloved," to take away all 
grace inherit and resident in the blessed Virgin, 
or in us : whereas the apostle's word signifies 
that we are truly made grateful, or gracious and 
acceptable ; that is to say, that our soul is 
inwardly endued and beautified with grace, and 
the virtues proceeding from it ; and conse- 
quently, is holy indeed before the sight of God, 
and not only so accepted or reputed, as they 
imagine. Which St. Chrysostom sufficiently 
testifies in these words : " He said not, which he 
freely gave us, but, wherein he made us grate- 
ful ; that is, not only delivered us from sins, but 
also made us beloved and amiable, made our 
soul beautiful and grateful, such as the angels 
and archangels desire to see, and such as him- 
self is in love withal, according to that in the 
Psalm, the king shall desire or be in love with 
thy beauty." (b) St. Hierom speaking of bap- 
tism, says : " Now thou art made clean in the 
laver : and of thee it is said, who is she that 
ascends white 1 and let her be washed, yet she 
cannot keep her purity, unless she be strength- 
ened from our Lord ;" (c) whence it is plain, 
that by baptism original sin being expelled, in- 
herent justice takes place in the soul, rendering 
it clean, white, and pure ; which purity the soul, 
strengthened by God's grace, may keep and 
conserve. 

(5) Another falsification they make here in 
Daniel, translating : "My justice was found out ;" 
and in another Bible, " My unguiltiness was 
found out," to draw it from inherent justice, 
which was in Daniel. In their last edition you 
see they are resolved to correct their brethren's 
fault ; notwithstanding though they mend one, 
yet they make another ; putting innocency in- 
stead of justice. It is very strange that our 
English Protestant divines should have such a 
pique against justice, that they cannot endure 
to see it stand in the text, where the Chaldee, 
Greek, and Latin place it. 

(6) It must needs be a spot of the same 
infection, that they translate " describeth" here ; 
as though imputed righteousness (for so they had 
rather say, than justice) were the description of 
blessedness. 



(ti) St. Chrys. in this place of the Ephesians. 
(c) St. Hierom., lib. 3, contra Pelagianos. 



82 



XXI. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS IN 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English aceord- 
g ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683. 


Hebrews 
chap. x. 
verse 22. 


" Accedamus" cum 
vero corde in " pleni- 
ludine" fidei, lx nkri- 
Qoyogia nlgtug. (1) 


Let us "approach" 
with a true heart, in 
" fulness" of faith. 


Let us " draw 
nigh" with a true 
heart, in " assu- 
rance" of faith. (1) 


Let us " draw 
near" with a true 
heart, in " full as- 
surance" of faith. 


1 Corinth, 
chap. xiii. 
verse 2. 


Et si habuero 
"omnem" nuaav,fi. 
dem, ita ut monies 
transferam charita- 
tem autem non ha- 
buero, nihil sum. (2) 


And if I should 
have " all" faith, so 
that I could remove 
mountains, and have 
not charity, I am 
nothing. 


If I should have 
"whole" faith. "To- 
tam fidem " saith 
Beza, for " omnem 
fidem." (2) 


— "All" faith. 


1 Corinth, 
chap. xii. 
verse 31, 


Et adhuc " exccl- 
lentiorem viam" vo- 
bis demonstro. 


And yet I show 
you a " more excel- 
lent way." 


Beza, in Testa- 
ment, 1556, trans- 
lates it : " Behold, 
moreover also," I 
show you a way 
" most diligently." 
And in another, viz., 
of 1565 : And "be- 
sides," I show you a 
way"to excellency." 


Corrected. 


St. James 
chap. ii. 
verse 22. 


Vides quoniam 
jides " co-operaba- 
tur," ovvijoyei, operi- 
bus illius. (3) 


Seest thou that faith 
" did work with" his 
works. 


Thou seest that 
faith " was a helper 
of" his works. — 
Beza. (3) 


Corrected. 


St. Luke 
chap, xviii. 
verse 42. 


Et Jesus dixit 
illi, respice, Jides 
liia te " salvum fe- 
cit," f[ nlgig as aeoa)- 
xi ae. (4) 


— Thy faith hath 
u maflp thpp wholp " 


— Thy faith hath 
" saved thee." (4) 


— Thy faith hath 

" Qa vpH thpp " 


St. Mark 
chap. x. 
verse 52, 
and 

chap. viii. 
verse 48. 


Vade, fides tua "te 
salvum fecit." 


— Thy faith hath 
" made thee safe." 


— Thy faith hath 
" saved thee." 


Corrected. 



DEFENCE OF THE SUFF1C 



IENCY OF FAITH ALONE. 



83 



All other means of salvation being thus taken 
away, as you have already seen, their only and 
last refuge is faith alone : and that not the 
Christian faith contained in the articles of the 
creed, and such like ; but a special faith and con- 
fidence, whereby every man must assuredly 
believe, that himself is the son of God, and one 
of the elect predestined to salvation. If he be 
not, by faith, as sure of this, as of Christ's incar- 
nation and death, he shall never be saved. 

( 1 ) For maintaining this heresy, they force 
the Greek text to express the very word of 
assurance and certainty thus : " Let us draw 
nigh with a true heart, in assurance of faith :" 
their last translation makes it, " in full assurance 
of faith ;" adding the word full to what it was 
before ; and that, either because they would be 
thought to draw that word from the original, or 
else because they would thereby signify such an 
assurance or certainty, as should be beyond all 
manner of doubt or fear ; thereby excluding not 
only charity, but even hope also, as unneces- 
sary. 

(2) The word in the Greek is far different 
from their expression ; for it signifies, properly, 
the fulness and completion of any thing ; and 
therefore, the apostle joins it sometimes with 
faith, sometimes with hope, (as in Heb. vi. 11,) 
sometimes with knowledge or understanding, 
(Col. ii. 2,) to signify the fulness of all three, as 
the Vulgate Latin interpreter most sincerely 
(Rom. iv. 21,) translates it. Thus when the 
Greek signifies " fulness of faith," rather than 
" full assurance," (or, as Beza has it, " certain 
persuasion,") " of faith ;" they err in the precise 
translation of it ; and much more do they err in 
the sense when they apply it to the " certain " 
and " assured faith," that every man ought to 
have, as they say, of his own salvation. Whereas 
the Greek fathers expound it of the " fulness of 
faith," that every faithful man must have all such 
things in heaven, as he sees not ; namely, that 
Christ is ascended thither, that he shall come 
with glory to judge the world, &c, (a) adding 
further, and proving out of the apostle's words 
next following, that (the Protestants) " only 
faith is not sufficient, be it ever so special or 
assured. "(J) For the said reason do they 
also translate, " The special gift of faith," (Sap. 
iii. 14,) instead of " The chosen gift of faith." 
Another gross corruption they have in Ecclesi- 
asticus, v. 5. But because, in their Bibles of 
the later stamp, they have rejected these books, 
as not canonical, though they can show us no 
more reason or authority for their so doing, than 
for altering and corrupting the text, I shall be 
content to pass it by. 

(3) Beza, by corrupting this place of the 
Corinthians, translating totam jidem for omnem 

(a) St. Chrysost., Theodoret , Theophyl. upon Rom. x. 
(«) St. Chrysost., Horn. 19, c. 10, ad Heb. 



Jidem, thinks to exempt from the apostle's words, 
their special justifying faith ; whereas it maybe 
easily seen, that St. Paul names and means 
" all faith," as he doth " all knowledge," and 
" all mysteries," in the foregoing words. And 
Luther confesses, that he thrust the word 
" only," (only faith) into the text.(c) 

(4) Also by his falsifying this text of St. 
James, he would have his reader think, as he 
also expounds it, " That faith was an efficient 
cause, and fruitful of good works ;" whereas the 
apostle's words are plain, that faith wrought 
together with his works ; yea, and that his faith 
was by works made perfect. This is an impu- 
dent handling of scripture, to make works the 
fruit only, and effect of faith ; which is their 
heresy. 

(5) Again, in all those places of the Gospel, 
where our blessed Saviour requires the people's 
faith, when he healed them of corporal diseases 
only, they gladly translate, " Thy faith hath 
saved thee," rather than, " Thy faith hath healed 
thee," or, " Thy faith hath made thee whole." 
And this they do, that by joining these words 
together, they may make it sound in the ears of 
the people, that faith saves and justifies a man : 
for so Beza notes in the margin, fides salvat, 
" faith saveth ;" whereas the faith that was here 
required, was of Christ's power and omnipotence 
only ; which, as Beza confesses, may be pos- 
sessed by the devils themselves ; and is far from 
the faith that justifies. (d) 



But they will say, the Greek signifies as they 
translate it : I grant it does so ; but it signi- 
fies very commonly to be healed corporally, as, 
by their own translation, in these places, Mark 
v. 26 ; Luke viii. 36, 48, 50 ; and in other places, 
where they translate, " I shall be whole," " they 
were healed ;" " he was healed ;" " she shall be 
made whole." And why do they here translate 
it so ? Because they know, " to be saved," 
imports rather the salvation of the soul : and 
therefore, when faith is joined with it, they 
translate it rather " saved " than " healed," to 
insinuate their justification by " faith only." 

But how contrary to the doctrine of the 
ancient fathers this Protestant error of " faith 
alone justifying" is, may be seen by those who 
please to read St. Augustine, De Fide et Opere, 
c. 14. 

To conclude, I will refer my Protestant 
SoLiFiDiANto the words of St. James the apos- 
tle ; where he will find, that faith alone, without 
works, cannot save him. 

(c) Luth., torn. 2, fol 405, edit. Witte., anno 1551. 
\<l) Beza Annot. in 1 Cor. xiii. 2. 



84 



XXII. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
A. D. 15G2, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon., an. 1683. 


2 Thessal. 
chap. ii. 
verse 15. 


Itaque fratres, 
state et tenete " tra- 
ditiones^nixonSoaEig, 
quas didicistis, sive 
per sermoncm, sive 
per epislolam nos- 
tram. (1) 


Therefore, bre- 
thren, stand and 
hold the " tradi- 
tions" which you 
have learned, whe- 
ther it be by word, 
or by our epistle. 


For " traditions," 
they say " ordinan- 
ces." (1) 


Corrected. 


2 Thessal. 
chap. iii. 
verse 6. 


— Ul subtrahatis 
vos ab omni fratre 
ambulante inordi- 
nate, et non secun- 
dum " traditionem," 
quam acceperunt a 
nobis. 


— That you with- 
draw yourselves 
from every brother 
walking inordinate- 
ly, and not accord- 
ing to the " tradi- 
tions" which they 
have received of us. 


Instead of " tradi- 
tions," they trans- 
late, " instructions." 


Corrected. 


i Corinth, 
chap. xi. 
verse 2. 


Laudo autem vos 
fratres, quod per 
omnia mei memores 
estis, et sicut " tra- 
didC vobts, pracepta 
mea tenetis, xadwg 
rtaqedoxu, Tac tiuqu- 
doaeig y.are/ETS. 


And I praise you 
brethren, that in all 
things you be mind- 
ful of ine, and as I 
have " delivered" 
unto you, you keep 
my " precepts." 


— And " keep the 
ordinances," as I 
have " preached" 
unto you. 


— And keep the 
" ordinances," as I 
have delivered them 
to you. 


Coloss. 
chap. ii. 
verse 20. 


Si ergo mortui estis 
cum Christo ab " ele- 
mentis"hujus 7mtndi: 
quid adhuc tanquam 
viventes in mundo de- 
cernitis ? xt doyfiuTi. 
Qeade. (2) 


If then you be 
dead with Christ 
from the "elements" 
of this world, why 
do you yet "decree" 
as living in the 
world 1 


If "ye" be dead 
with Christ from 
the " rudiments" of 
"the" world, why, 
" as though" living 
in the world, " are 
ye led with tradi- 
tions ?" And, " are 
ye burthened with 
traditions ?" (2) 


— Why, as though 
living in the world, 
are you " subject to 
ordinances V 


1 Peter 
chap. i. 
verse 18. 


Scientes quod non 
corruptibilibus auro 
vel argento redempti 
estis de vana vestra 
conversatione "pa- 
ternal traditionis," ex 
TVS ftonaiag ifioiv 
ccpcc^00(pr^g TiocTQOTict- 
Qccdoro. (3) 


Knowing that not 
with corruptible 
things, gold or sil- 
ver, you are re- 
deemed from your 
vain conversation of 
" your fathers' tradi- 
tion." 


" You were" not 
redeemed with cor- 
ruptible things, gold 
or silver, from your 
vain conversation 
" received by the" 
tradition of the" fa- 
tners. yo) 


— From your 
vain conversation 
" received by tradi- 
tion from your fa- 
thers." 



APOSTOLICAL 

A general mark, wherewith all heretics that 
have ever disturbed God's church have been 
branded, is, " to reject apostolical traditions," 
and to fly to the scripture, as by themselves ex- 
pounded, for their " only rule of faith." We 
read not of any heresy since the apostles' time, 
on which this character has been more deeply 
stamped, than in those of this last age, especially 
the first heads of them, and those who were the 
interpreters and translators of the scriptures ; 
whom we find to have been possessed with such 
prejudice against apostolical tradition, that 
wheresoever the holy scripture speaks against 
certain traditions of the Jews, there all the Eng- 
lish translations follow the Greek exactly, never 
omitting to translate the Greek word nugadoaig, 
" tradition." On the contrary, wheresoever the 
sacred text speaks in commendation of tradi- 
tions, to wit, such traditions as the apostles de- 
livered to the church, there (1) all their first 
translations agree not to follow the Greek, 
which is still the self-same word ; but for tradi- 
tions, use the words ordinances or instructions, 
preachings, institutions, and any word else, 
rather than traditions : insomuch, that Beza, 
the master of our English scripturists, translates 
the word Tiaguddasig, traditam doctrinam, " the 
doctrine delivered," putting the singular number 
for the plural, and adding " doctrine" of his own 
accord, (a) 



Who could imagine their malice and partiality 
against traditions to be so great, that they should 
all agree, in their first translations I mean ; 
for they could not but blush at it in their last, 
with one consent so duly and exactly, in all 
these places set down in the former page, to 
conceal and suppress the word tradition, which, 
in other places, they so gladly make use of? I 
appeal to their consciences, whether these things 
were not done on purpose, and with a very 
wicked intention, to signify to the reader, that all 
traditions are to be reproved and rejected, and 
none allowed. 



(2) In some places they do so gladly use this 
word tradition, that rather than want it, they 
make bold to thrust it. into the text, when it is 
not in the Greek at all; as you see in this place 
of the Epistle to the Colossians, (b) " Why, as 
though living in the world, are you led with 
traditions ?" And as another English Bible reads 
mere heretically, " Why are ye burthened with 
traditions ?" Doubtless, they knew as well then, 
as they do now at this day, that this Greek word 
Soy/ja, doth not signify tradition ; yea, they were 
not ignorant, when a little before, in the same 



(a) 2 Thes. ii. 3. 

(b) Bib. 1579. 

12 



TRADITIONS. 85 

chapter, and in other places, themselves trans- 
late doy/tcna, " ordinances," " decrees." (c) 
Was not this done then to make the very name 
of tradition odious among the people 1 



And though some of these gross corruptions 
are corrected by their last translators, yet we 
have no reason to think they were amended out 
of any good or pure intention, but rather to de- 
fend some of their own traditions, viz., wearing 
of the rocket, surplice, four-cornered cap, keep- 
ing the first day in the week holy, baptizing in- 
fants, &c, all which things being denied by 
their more refined brethren, as not being clearly 
to be proved out of scripture, and they having 
no other refuge to fly to but tradition, were forced 
to translate tradition in some places, where it is 
well spoken of. But, I say, this could not 
be from any pure intention of correcting their 
corrupted scripture ; but rather for the said self- 
end ; which appears evidently enough from 
their not also correcting other notorious falsifi- 
cations, (as 1 Pet. i. 18,) (3) " You were not re- 
deemed with corruptible things, from your vain 
conversation received by tradition from your 
fathers ;" where the Greek lx xrjg /xaralag i/uuv 
uvaqgoyrig naTQonaQodbiu, is rather to be thus 
translated, and it is the Greek they pretend to 
follow, and not our Vulgate Latin which they 
condemn : " From your vain conversation de- 
livered by the fathers ;" but because it sounds 
with the simple people, to be spoken against the 
traditions of the Roman Church, they were as 
glad to suffer it to pass, as the former translators 
were, for the same reason, to foist in the word 
tradition ; and for delivered, to say received. I 
say, because it is the phrase of the Catholic 
Church, that it has received many things by 
tradition, which they would here control by like- 
ness of words, in their false translations. But 
concerning the word tradition, they will tell us, 
perhaps, the sense thereof is included in the 
Greek word, delivered. We grant it : bu* 
would they be content, if we should always ex- 
pressly add tradition, where it is so included ? 
Then should we say in the Corinthians, " I praise 
you, that as I have delivered to you, by tradition, 
you keep my precepts or traditions." And again, 
" For I received of our Lord, which also I de- 
livered unto you, by tradition." (d) And in 
another place, " As they, by tradition, delivered 
unto us, which from the beginning saw," &c, 
and such like, by their example, we should 
translate in this sort. But we use not this licen- 
tious manner in translating the holy scriptures ; 
neither is it a translator's part, but an interpre- 
ter's, and his that makes a commentary : nor 
does a good cause need any other translation 
than the express text of the scripture. 



(c) Col. ii. 14 ; Eph. ii. 15. 
(rf) 1 Cor. xi. 2, 23 ; Luke i. 2. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST APOSTOLICAL TRADITIONS. 



86 

But if you say, (a) that our Vulgate Latin 
has, in this place, the word tradition ; we grant 
it has so, and therefore, we also translate accor- 
dingly : but you, as I hinted above, profess to 
translate the Greek, and not our Vulgate Latin, 
which you condemn as papistical, and say it is 
the worst of all, though Beza, your master, 
pronounces it to be the best, (b) And will you, 
notwithstanding, follow the said Vulgate Latin, 
rather than the Greek, when you find it seems 
to make for your purpose ? This is your par- 
tiality and inconstancy. One while you will 
follow it, though it differ from the Greek ; and 
another time you reject it, though it agree with 
the Greek most exactly ; as we have shown you 
above, (Col. ii. 20,) where the Vulgate Latin 
hath nothing of traditions, but, quid decernitis, as 
it is in the Greek ; yet there your sincere breth- 
ren translate : " Why are ye burthened with 
traditions ?" 



Is not all this to bolster up their errors and 
heresies, without sincerely following either the 
Greek or Latin ? The Greek, at least, why do 
they not follow? Doth the Greek nuquSoaeic, 
induce them to say, ordinances for traditions ? 
Or ddyftttTo lead them to say, traditions for de- 
crees 1 Or Sixaithfiuia, nqeofivieQOSi udrjg, el'Suiloi', 
&c, force them to translate ordinances for jus- 
tifications, elder for priest, grave for hell, image 
for idol, <fec. ? No ! Where they are afraid of 
being disadvantageous to their heresies, they 
scruple not to reject and forsake both the Greek 
and Latin. 



Though Protestants, in their last translation of 
the Bible, have indeed corrected this error in 
several places, not in all, on purpose, thereby to 
defend themselves against their Puritanical bre- 
thren, when they charge them with several Po- 
pish observances, ceremonies, and traditions, 
which they cannot maintain by scripture alone, 
without being forced, as is said, to fly to unwrit- 
ten traditions : yet, when they either dispute 
with, or write against Catholics, they utterly 
deny traditions, and stick fast to the scripture 
alone, for their " only rule of faith :" falsely 
asserting, that the scripture was received by the 
primitive church as a " perfect rule of faith." 



These are the words of a late ministerial (c) 
guide of the Church of England, " The scrip- 
ture was yet (viz., when St. Augustine was sent 



(a) Discovery of the Rock, p. 147. 

(b) Beza, Praf. in Nov. Test-, 1556. 

(c) See the Pamphlet called a Second Defence of the 
Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England, 
&c.,p. 13, n 24. 



into England) received as a perfect rule of 
faith :" for which he cites another authority like 
his own. But how true this is, let the holy 
fathers of the first five hundred years satisfy us. 



St. Chrysostom, expounding the words of St. 
Paul, (2 Thess. xv.) affirms, that " Hereby it 
appears, that the apostles did not deliver all 
things by epistle, but many things without wri- 
ting ; and these are worthy of faith : wherefore 
also, let us esteem the tradition of the church 
to be believed. It is a tradition, seek no fur- 
ther." {d) 



And the same exposition is given by St. Basil, 
Theophyiact, and St. John Damascene : as also 
by St. Epiphanius ; who says, " We must use 
tradition, for all things cannot be received from 
divine scripture ; wherefore the holy apostles 
have delivered some things by tradition : even 
as the holy apostle says, as I have delivered to 
you, and elsewhere ; so I teach, and have de- 
livered in the churches." (e) 



St. Augustine, proving that those who were 
baptized by heretics should not be re-baptized, 
says, " the apostles commanded nothing hereof ; 
but that doctrine which was opposed herein 
against Cyprian, is to be believed to proceed 
from their tradition, as many things be, which 
the church holds ; and are therefore, well be- 
lieved to be commanded of the apostles, al- 
though they are not written." (/) These words 
of this great doctor are so clear, that Mr. Cart- 
wright, (g) a Protestant, speaking thereof, says, 
" To allow St. Augustine's words, is to bring in 
Popery again." And in another place, (/?) " If 
St. Augustine's judgment be a good judgment, 
then there be some things commanded of God, 
which are not in the scriptures, and thereupon 
no sufficient doctrine contained in the scriptures." 
How to make all this agree with the doctrine of 
our present ministerial guides of the Church 
of England, who teach that in those primitive 
times, " the scripture was received as a perfect 
and only rule of faith," will be a task that, I am 
confident, no wise man, who has either honour, 
credit, or respect for truth, will venture to un- 
dertake. 



(d) St. Chrys. in 2 Thes. Horn. 4. 

(c) See St. Basil de Spirit. Sanct, c. 29 ; Theophil. in 
2 Thess. ii. ; St. Damasc, cap. 17, de Imag. Sanct. ; St 
Epiph. Hser. 61. 

(f ) St. Aug. de Bapt. contra Don., lib. 5, cap. 23. 

(g) In Whitg. Def, p. 103. 

(k) And his Second Reply against Whitg., part I., pp. 

1 84, 85, 86. 



XXIII, PROTESTANT TRANSLATION AGAINST THE SACRAMENT OF MARRIAGE. 87 



The Book, 
Chapter, 

• mmi i tiac. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Trunsliition , 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bihles, printed 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon. 3 n» 1 683. 


Ephesians 
chap. v. 
verse 32. 


" Sacramentum " 
/uvg^qiov, hoc mag- 
num est. (1) 


This is a great 
" sacrament." 


This is a great 
" secret." (1) 


This is a great 
" mystery." 



(1 ) The church of God esteems marriage a holy 
sacrament, as giving grace to the married per- 
sons, to live together in love, concord, and 
fidelity. But Protestants, who reckon it no 
more than a civil contract, as it is amongst in- 
fidels, translated this text accordingly, calling it, 
in their first translations, instead of a " great 
sacrament," or " mystery," as in the Greek, a 
" great secret." 



But we will excuse them for not translating 
" sacrament," because they pretended not to 
translate the Latin but the Greek : yet, however, 
we must ask them, why they call it not " mys- 
tery," as it is in the Greek ? Doubtless, they 
can give us no other reason, but that they 
wished only to avoid both those words, which 
are used in the Latin and Greek Church, to sis- 
nify sacrament ; for the word mystery is the 
same in Greek, that sacrament is in Latin ; and 
in the Greek church, the sacrament of the body 
and blood itself, is called by the name of mys- 
tery, or mysteries ; so that, if they should have 
called matrimony by that name, it would have 
sounded equally well as a sacrament also : but 
in saying, " it is a great secret," they are sure it 
shall not be taken for a sacrament. 



But perhaps, they will say, is not every sacra- 
ment and mystery, in English, " a secret V Yes, 
as angel is a " messenger ;" priest, an " elder ;" 
apostle, " one that is sent ;" baptism, " washing ;" 
evangelist, " a bringer of good news ;" Holy 
Ghost, " Holy Wind ;" bishop, " overseer or 
superintendent." But when the holy scripture 
uses these words to signify more excellent and 
divine things than those of the common sort, 
pray does it become translators to use profane, 



instead of ecclesiastical terms, and thereby to 
disgrace the writing and meaning of the Holy 
Ghost ? 



The same Greek word, in all other places, (a) 
they translated mystery ; who, therefore, can 
imagine any other reason for the translating of it 
" secret" in this place, than lest it might seem to 
make against their heretical opinion, " That 
marriage is no sacrament ?" though the apostle 
makes it such a mystery, or sacrament, as repre- 
sents no less than the conjunction of Christ and 
his church, and whatsoever is most excellent in 
that .conjunction. 



And St. Augustine teaches, that " a certain 
sacrament of marriage is commended to the 
faithful that are married ; whereupon the 
apostle says : ' Husbands, love your wives ; as 
Christ loved the church.' " (b) And Fulk grants, 
that " Augustine and some others of the ancient 
fathers take it, that matrimony is a great mystery 
of the conjunction of Christ and his church." (c) 



But because they have kept to the Greek in 
their last translation, I shall say no more of it ; 
nor should I indeed have thus much noticed it 
here, but to show the reader how intolerably 
partial and crafty they were in their first trans- 
lations. 



(a) Tim. lit; Col. i. 26; Eph. iii. 9; 1 Cor. xv. 15. 

(b) St. Aug. de Nupt. et Concup., lib. i. c. 10. 

(c) Fulk. in Rhem. Test, in Ephes. v. 32, sect. 5. 



Here follow several heretical additions, and other notorious falsifications, <^c. 



88 



XXIV. PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS 



The Book, 
Chapter, 
and Verse. 


The Vulgate Latin Text. 


The true English accord- 
ing to the Rhemish 
Translation. 


Corruptions in the Pro- 
testant Bibles, printed 
A. u. 1562, 1577, 1579. 


The last Translation of 
the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
Lon. an. 1683. 


2 Paralip. 
or Chron. 
ch. xxxvi. 
verse 8. 


Reliqua autem 
verborum. Joakim, et 
abominationum ejus, 
quas operatus est, 
"et qua. invent a sunt 
in eo," continentur in 
libro regum Jude et 
Israel. (1) 


But the rest of 
the words of Joakim, 
and of his abomi- 
nations which he 
wrought, " and the 
things that were 
found in him," are 
contained in the 
book of the kings of 
Judah and Israel. 


The rest of the 
acts of Jehoakin, 
and his abomina- 
tions which he did, 
" and carved images 
that were laid to his 
charge, "behold they 
are written in the 
book of the kings of 
Judah and Israel. 
(1) 


Corrected. 


Acts of 
the Apos. 
chap. ix. 
verse 22. 


Et confundcbat 
JudcEos qui habita- 

L a T\ '17* 

bant Damasci, ajjir- 
mans quoniam hie est 
Christies. (2) 


And confounded 
the Jews, &c, affirm- 
mg that this is 
Christ. 


Saul confounded 
the Jews, proving, 
" by conferring one 
scripture with ano- 
ther," that this is 
very Christ. (2) 


Corrected. 


1 St. Peter 
chap. i. 
verse 25. 
See the 
like addi- 
tion in 
1 Corinth, 
chap. ix. 
verse 17. 


Verbum autem 
Domini manct in 
sternum : hoc est 
autem verbum quod 
" evangelizatum est" 
in vos. (3) 


But the word of 
our Lord remaineth 
for ever : and this 
is the word that 
" is evangelized " 
among you. 


The word of the 
Lord endureth for 
ever : and this is the 
word which " by the 
gospel" was preach- 
ed unto you. (3) 


— And this is 
the word, which 
" by the gospel" is 
preached unto you. 


St. James 
chap. iv. 
verse 6. 


Majorem autem 
dat gratiam. (4) 


And giveth greater 
graces. 


But " the scrip- 
ture" offereth grea- 
ter grace. (4) 


But "he" giveth 
more grace. 


Colossians 
chap. i. 
verse 23. 


Si tamen pcrmane- 
tis in fide fundati et 
stabiles, et immobiles 
a spe cvangelii quod 
audistis, quod pr&di- 
catum est in universa 
crealura que sub 
cazlo est. (5) 


If yet ye continue 
in the faith ground- 
ed and stable, and 
unmoveable from 
the hope of the gos- 
pel which you have 
heard, which is 
preached among all 
creatures, &c. 


If ye continue 
established in the 
faith, and be not 
moved away from 
the hope of the 
gospel, which you 
have heard " how it 
was" preached. Or, 
" whereof" ye have 
heard " how that it" 
is preached. Or, 
6i whereof" ye have 
heard " and which 
hath been"preached. 
(5) 


Which ye have 
heard, " and which 
was" preached to 
every creature. 



BY ADDING TO THE TEXT. 



89 



(1) I have not set down these few examples 
of their additions, as if they were all the only 
places in the Bible that*were corrupted after 
zhis manner ; for if you observe well in the fore- 
going chapters, you will find both additions and 
diminutions ; and that so frequently done, and 
with such wonderful boldness, as if these trans- 
lators had been privileged by especial license to 
add to, or diminish from, the sacred text at 
their pleasures : or, as if themselves had been 
only excepted from that general curse denounced 
against all such as either add to, or diminish 
from it, in the close of the Holy Bible (Apo- 
calypse xxii. 18, 19,) in these words, " For I 
testify to every one, hearing the words of the 
prophecy of this book : If any man shall add to 
these things, God shall add unto him the plagues 
written in this book. And if any man shall 
diminish of the words of the book of this pro- 
phecy, God shall take away his part out of the 
book of life, and out of the holy city, and of 
these things that be written in this book." 

Against holy images they maliciously add to 
the text these words " carved images, that were 
laid to his charge." And to what intent is this, 
but to deceive the ignorant reader, and to fo- 
ment his hatred against the images of Christ, 
and his saints 1 as they have done also in another 
place, (Rom. xi. 4,) where they maliciously add 
the word " image" to the text, where it is not in 
the Greek, saying, instead of " I have left me 
seven thousand men, who have not bowed their 
knees to Baal," thus, " I have left me seven 
thousand men, who have not bowed their knee to 
the image of Baal." («) 

(2) " By conferring one scripture with 
another:" this is added more than is in the 
Greek, in favour of their presumptuous opinion, 
that the comparing of the scriptures is enough 
for any man to undertsand them himself, solely 
by his own diligence and endeavour ; and thereby 
to reject both the commentaries of the doctors, 
and the exposition of holy councils, and the Ca- 
tholic Church, (b) 

(3) " By the gospel :" These words are* 
added deceitfully, and of ill intent, to make the 
simple reader think, that there is no other word 
of God, but the written word ; for the common 
reader, hearing this word gospel, conceives 
nothing else. But indeed all is gospel, what- 
soever the apostles taught, either by writing, or 
by tradition, and word of mouth. 

It is written of Luther, (c) that in his first 
translation of the Bible into the German tongue, 
he left out these words of the apostle clearly : 
" This is the word which is evangelized to you ;" 
because St. Peter does here define what is the 
word of God, saying : " That which is preached" 
to you, and not that only which is written. 

(a) Bible 1562. 

(b) Bible 1577. 

(c) Lind. Dubitat, p. 88. 



(4) In this place they add to the text the 
words " the scripture ;" where the apostle may 
as well, and indifferently say : " The Spirit," or, 
" Holy Ghost," gives more graces, as is more 
probable he meant, and is so expounded by 
many. And so also this last translation of theirs 
intimates, by inserting the word He : " But He 
giveth more grace :" though this is more than 
they can stand by. But they will never be pre- 
vented from inserting their commentary in the 
text, and restraining the " Holy Ghost" to one 
particular sense, where his words seem to be 
ambiguous, which the Latin interpreter never 
presumed to do, but always leaves it as open to 
either signification in the Latin, as he found it 
in the Greek. 

(5) In this last place they alter the apostle's 
plain speech with certain words of their own ; 
for they will not have him say, " Be unmoveable 
in the faith and gospel, which you have heard, 
which has been preached ;" but, " whereof you 
have heard how it was preached ;" and though 
he spoke not of the gospel preached to them, 
but of a gospel which they had only heard of, 
that was preached in the world. 

The apostle exhorts the Colossians to con- 
tinue grounded in the faith and gospel, which 
they had heard and received from their apos- 
tles, (d) But our Protestants, who with Hy- 
menaeus and Alexander, and other old heretics, 
have fallen from their first faith, approve not of 
this exhortation. 

It is certain that these words, " whereof you 
have heard how it was preached," are not so in 
the Greek ; but, " which you have heard, which 
has been preached :" as if it were said, that 
they should continue constant in the faith and 
gospel, which themselves had received, and 
which was then preached and received in the 
whole world. 

In Cor. xiv. 4, where it is said, " He that 
speaketh with tongues, edifieth himself;" the 
Bible printed 1683, translates thus : "He that 
speaketh in an unknown tongue, edifieth him- 
self;" so likewise in the 13th, 14th, 19th, and 
27th verses, they make the same addition ; so 
that in this one chapter they add the word " un- 
known" no less than five times to the text, where 
it is not in the Greek. And this they do, on pur- 
pose to make it seem to the ignorant people, that 
mass and other ecclesiastical offices ought not to 
be said in Latin : whereas there is nothing here 
either written or meant of any other tongues, 
but such as men spoke in the primitive church 
by miracle ; to wit, barbarous and strange 
tongues, which could not be interpreted com- 
monly, but by the miraculous gift also of inter- 
pretation : and though also they might by a 
miracle speak the Latin, Greek, or Hebrew 
tongues ; yet these could not be counted unknown 

(d) 1 Tim. i. 6. 



90 



i-ROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS BY ADDING TO THE TEXT. 



tongues, as being the common languages of the 
world, and of the learned in every city : and in 
which also the scriptures of the Old and New 
Testament were written ; which could not be 
said to have been written in an unknown tongue, 
though they were not penned in the vulgar lan- 
guage, peculiar to all people ; but in a learned 
and known speech, capable of being interpreted 
by thousands in every country, though not by 
every illiterate person. 

I would gladly know from our translators, 
what moved them to add the word " unknown" 
in some places, and not in others, where the 
Greek word is the same in all ? For instance, in 
the fifth verse of this chapter, where the apos- 
tle wishes that all should speak with tongues ; 
they translate exactly according to the Greek, 
without adding to the text ; when in all the 
other places, where tliey think there may be 
some shadow or colour of having it meant of 
the general tongue, and known language of 
the church, they partially, and with a very ill 
meaning, thrust in the word " unknown." See 
the annotations upon this place, in the Rhemish 
Testament 

Again, Rom. xii. 6, 7, where the apostle's 
words are, " Having gifts according to the grace 
that is given us, different, either prophecy ac- 
cording to the rule of faith : or ministry, in 
ministering ; or he that teaches, in doctrine ;" 
they, by adding several words of their own, not 
found in the Greek, and altering others, make 
the text run thus ; " Having then gifts, differing 
according to the grace that is given us, whether 
prophecy (let us prophecy) according to the 
proportion of faith ; or ministry (let us wait on 
our) ministering ; or he that teaches on teach- 
ing." 

Besides their additions here, they pervert the 
text, by changing the word " rule" of faith into 
" proportion" of faith ; whereby they would have 
their readers to gather no more from this place, 
than only that their new ministers are to pro- 
phecy or preach, and wait on their ministering 
according to the measure or proportion of faith 
or ability, less or more, that they are endued 
with. Whereas by this text, as also by many 
other places of holy writ, we may gather that 
the apostles, by inspiration of the Holy Ghost, 
before they divided themselves into divers na- 
tions, made among themselves a certain rule and 
form of faith and doctrine, containing not only the 
twelve Articles of the Creed ; but all other prin- 
ciples, grounds, and the whole platform of the 
Christian Religion ; which rule was before any 
of the books of the New Testament were writ- 
ten, and before the faith was preached among the 
Gentiles ; by which rule not only the doctrine 
of all other inferior teachers was to be tried, but 
also the preaching, writing, and interpreting, 
which is here called prophecying, of the apos- 
tles and evangelists themselves, were by God's 
Church approved and admitted, or reproved and 
rejected according to this rule of faith. This 



form or rule every apostle delivered by word of 
mouth, not by scripture, to the country by them 
converted, which was also by the apostolical 
men, and those who received it entire from the 
apostles, delivered also entire to the next follow- 
ing age ; which also receiving it from them, de- 
livered it as they had received it, to the succeed- 
ing age, &c, till this our present age. 

And this is the true analogy of faith, set down 
and commended to us everywhere for apostolical 
tradition ; and not the fantastical rule or square, 
which every ministerial guide, according to his 
great or small proportion of faith, pretends to 
gather out of the scriptures, as understood by 
his own private spirit, and wrested to his own 
heretical purpose ; by which he will presume to 
judge of, and censure the fathers, councils, 
church, yea, the scripture itself. In the primi- 
tive church, as also in the church of God, at 
this day, all teaching, preaching, and prophecy- 
ing are not measured according to the proportion 
of every man's private and public spirit, but by 
this rule of faith, first set down and delivered by 
the apostles : and therefore, whatsoever novelties 

! or prophecyings will not abide this text, they 
are justly, by the apostles, condemned, as con- 

, trary and against the rule of faith thus delivered. 

I cannot omit taking notice, in this place, of 
] two " notorious and gross corruptions" in their 
i first translation, seeing they much concern the 
Church of England's " priesthood." The first is 
in Acts i. 26, where, instead of saying : " He, 
Matthias, was numbered with the eleven ;" they 
translate it, " He was, by a common consent, 
counted with the eleven." The other, already 
mentioned, is, " Acts, xiv. 22, where, for, " When 
! they had ordained to them priests in every 
|| church," they say : " When they had ordained 
: elders by election in every congregation." In 
one of these texts, the words, " by a common 

I consent," and in the other, " by election," are 
added on purpose to make the scripture speak in 

! defence of their making superintendents and el- 

II ders by election only, without consecration and 
, ordination, by imposition of hands : by which 

•corrupt additions it evidently appears to have 
been the doctrine of the Church of England, in 
those days, that election only, without conse- 
\ cration, was sufficient to make bishops and 
priests. 

But in their last translation, made in the be- 
ginning of King James the First's reign, they 
have corrected these places, by expunging the 
words formerly added. And this was done by 
the bishops and clergy, for their great honour, 
dignity, and authority ; knowing that consecra- 
l tion, which they thought now high time to pre- 
tend to, must needs elevate them much above 
the sphere of a bare election, in which they for- 
merly moved. And perhaps, another no less 
prevalent reason was, that they might more se- 
curely fix themselves in their bishoprics and 
benefices ; thinking, perhaps, that bishops con- 
secrated, might pretend to that jure divino, 



CONSIDERATIONS ON T 

which men only elected by the congregation or 
prince, held at the mercy and good liking of the 
electors : what other motives induced them to 
this, matters not. However, they thought it 
now convenient to pretend to something more 
than a bare election ; to wit, to receive an epis- 
copal and priestly character, by the imposition 
of hands : whereas we find not, that their prede- 
cessors, Parker, Jewel, Horn, &c, ever pre- 
tended to any other character, but what they 
received by the Queen's letters patent, election, 
and an act of parliament ; as is plain from the 
23rd and 25th of their 39 Articles, as well as 
from the statute 8 Eliz. I., and therefore were 
content to have the scripture read, " He was, by 
a common consent, counted with the eleven ;" 
and, " When they had ordained elders by elec- 
tion."^) 

And whereas our present ministerial guides of 
the Church of England, would gladly have 
people believe them to have a succession of 
bishops from the apostolic times to this day ; yet 
so far was Mr. Parker, Jewel, and the rest of 
their first bishops, from pretending to any such 
episcopal succession, " if they had been truly 
consecrated, they must of necessity have owned 
and maintained a succession among them," that, 
on the contrary, they published and preached 
many things to discredit the same : and to that 



HE LAMBETH RECORDS. 91 

purpose, falsified and corrupted the scripture 
against succession, for in the defence of the 
apology of the Church of England, they write 
thus : " By succession Christ saith, that desola- 
tion shall sit in the holy place, and anti-christ 
shall press into the room of Christ ;" for proof 
of which, they note in the margin, Matt. xxiv. 
And in another place of the same defence, they 
say of succession : St. Paul says to the faithful at 
Ephesus : " I know that after my departure 
hence, ravening wolves shall enter and succeed 
me ; and out of yourselves there shall, by suc- 
cession, spring up men speaking perversely ;" 
whereas St. Paul has never a word about suc- 
cession or succeeding ; nor is succession named 
in the 24th of St. Matthew. (c) So that you 
see, the first bishops of the Church of England, 
not only corrupted the sacred text, in translating 
many places of the Bible against ordination ; 
but also in their other writings, falsified the scrip- 
ture with their corrupt additions against succes- 
sion, (d) Two sufficient reasons for us to believe, 
that they neither had nor pretended to either con- 
secration, or episcopal succession in those days ; 
consequently were not consecrated at Lambeth, 
by such as had received their consecration and 
character from Roman Catholic bishops, who 
claim it no otherwise than by an uninterrupted 
succession from the apostles, and so from Christ. 
And this obliges me to digress a little into (d) 



CONSIDERATIONS ON THE LAMBETH RECORDS, 

BY WHICH PROTESTANT BISHOPS ENDEAVOUR TO PROVE THE CONSECRATION OF THEIR FIRST 
ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, DR. MATTHEW PARKER. 



(b) In the beginning of King James the 
First's reign, a new translation of the Bible being 
undertaken, the said falsifications of scripture 
corrected, and a full resolution put on of 
assuming to themselves the character of conse- 
crated bishops and priests ; they thought it 
absolutely necessary to derive this character 
from such bishops as had been, as they thought, 
consecrated by Roman Catholic bishops ; by 
whose hands they would now make the world 
believe, the first of their predecessors, Matthew 
Parker, was consecrated with great solemnity 
at Lambeth. To which purpose, they presume 
to obtrude upon the world certain, before un- 
heard of, records or registers. But the age in 
which the sun first shone upon these records, 
viz., anno 161 3, not being so easily imposed upon 
as was expected, the said Lambeth Register 
became suspected, and, for divers reasons, 
detected as a forged instrument. Fitzherbert, 
a man of great sincerity and authority, writ 
against these Lambeth Records, in the very year 

(a) Dr. Tenison and A. B., in the Speculum Considered, 
p. 49, tell us, " That in the Church of England they have 
a succession of bishops continued down from the apos- 
tolic times to this day ; but to name or number them," 
they say, " is neither necessary nor useful." They might 
bave added, not possible. 

(A) The Lambeth Records Considered. 



that Mr. Mason, workman to Dr. Abbot, 
archbishop of Canterbury, first published them 
to the world. These are his words : (e) " It 
was my chance to understand, that one Mr. 
Mason, lately published a book, wherein he 
endeavours to prove the consecration of the 
first Protestant bishops, by a register, testifying, 
that four bishops consecrated Matthew Parker, 
the first archbishop of Canterbury. Thou shalt 
therefore understand, good reader, that this our 
exception, touching the lawful vocation and 
consecration of the first Protestant bishops in 
the late queen's clay, is not a new quarrel, now 
lately raised, but vehemently urged divers times 
heretofore, by many other Catholics, many years 
ago ; yea, in the very beginning of the late 
queen's reign : as namely, by two learned doc- 
tors, Harding and Stapleton, who mightily 
pressed them with the defect of due vocation 
and consecration, urging them to prove the same, 
and to show how, and by whom they were made 
priests and bisheps." Thus he. 

(c) See the Defence of the Apol., pp. 132, and 127. 

(d) The first Protestant bishops and clergy were so far 
from pretending to either consecration orsuccession, that 
they corrupted the scripture against both. 

(e) ,See Fitzherbert's Appendix to the Discovery of 
Dr. Andrews' Absurdities, Falsities, and Lies, printed 
anno 16)3. 



93 



CONSIDERATIONS ON THE 



And to give you the words of the said doc- 
tors : thus writes Dr. Harding to Mr. Jewel, 
pretended bishop of Salisbury : " It remains, 
Mr. Jewel, you tell us, whether your vocation 
be ordinary or extraordinary : if it be ordinary, 
show us the letters of your orders ; at least, 
show us that you have received power to do the 
office you presume to exercise, by the due order 
of laying on of hands, and consecration ; but 
order and consecration you have none ; for 
which of all these new ministers, howsoever else 
you call them, could give that to you, which he 
has not himself ?" These are his very words to 
Mr. Jewel ; having but a little before urged 
him also, in the words of Tertullian, thus : 
" You know what Tertullian says of such as you 
be, Edant origines ecclesiarum suarum ; we say 
likewise to you, Mr. Jewel ; and what we say to 
you, we say to each one of your companions : 
tell us the original, and first spring of your 
church ; show us the register of your bishops 
continually succeeding one another from the 
beginning ; so as that the first bishop may have 
some one of the apostles, or of the apostolical 
men, for his author, and predecessor, &c.(a) 
Therefore, says he, to go from your succession, 
which you cannot prove, and to come to your 
vocation : How say you, sir ? you bear yourself, 
as though you were bishop of Salisbury ; but how 
can you prove your vocation ? by what authority 
usurp you the administration of doctrine and 
sacraments ? what can you allege for the right 
and proof of your ministry ? who has called you ? 
who has laid hands on you ? by what example 
has he done it 1 how, and by whom are you con- 
secrated 1 who has sent you ? who has committed 
to you the office you take upon you ?" &c. In 
this manner was Mr. Jewel urged : to all which 
he never replied, by sending Dr. Harding to 
any register of his, or his metropolitan's conse- 
cration : or by telling him, that their consecration 
at Lambeth, was upon record : or that they had 
authentic testimonies to show who imposed hands 
upon them. And how easily had such answers 
been given to these hard questions, if there had 
then been extant any authentic register or 
records of his own, or of Matthew Parker's 
consecration at Lambeth. 

After the same manner he is set upon by Dr. 
Stapleton, in his answer to Mr. Jewel's book, 
entitled, a reply, &c. : " How chanced then, Mr. 
Jewel," says he, " that you and your fellows, 
bearing yourselves for bishops, have not so much 
as this congruity and consent ; I will not say of 
the Pope, but of any Christian bishops at all, 
throughout all Christendom ; neither are liked 
and allowed by any one of them all ; but have 
taken upon you that office, without any imposi- 
tion of hands, without all ecclesiastical authority, 
without all order of canons and right? I ask not, 
who gave you bishoprics, but who made you 
bishops?" Thus he to Jewel. (b) 

(a) We also at this day still urge our Protestant bish- 
ops to prove their succession. But they, instead of doing 
it, waive us off with these words : " To name or number 
our bishops, is neither useful nor necessary." Vide Supr. 

(i) See Stapleton's Return of Untruhts. His Challenge 
to Jewel and Horn, and his Counterblast against Horn. 



And thus again, in his Counterblast against 
Horn, pretended bishop of Winchester: "Is 
it not notorious," says he to Horn, " that you 
and your colleagues, Parker, &c, were not or- 
dained according to the prescript, I will not say 
of the church, but even of the very statutes ? 
How then can you challenge to yourself the 
name of the lord bishop of Winchester ?" And 
in another place he urges Mr. Horn with his 
" being without any consecration at all of his 
metropolitan, Parker ; himself, poor man," says 
he, " being no bishop neither." Who, I say once 
again, can imagine Jewel and Horn should have 
been so careless of their character and honour, 
as not to have produced their Lambeth register 
and records, if any such authentic writings 
had then been extant, when not only their own 
credit, but even the credit of their metropolitan, 
Parker, and all the rest of Queen Elizabeth's 
new bishops ; yea, the whole succession of that 
race, were so miserably shipwrecked ? Yea, in 
how great stead would such Lambeth writings 
have stood Mr. Horn, when he durst not join 
issue with bishop Bonner upon the plea, " That 
he was no bishop, when he tendered Bonner the 
oath of supremacy." 

The case was thus :(c) By the first session of 
that parliament, 5 Eliz. I., power was given to 
any bishop in the realm, to tender the oath of 
supremacy, enacted 1 Eliz., to any ecclesiastical 
person within his diocese ; and the refuser was 
to incur a premunire. By virtue of this statute, 
Mr. Robert Horn, pretended bishop of Win- 
chester, tenders the oath to Doctor Bonner, 
bishop of London, but deprived by Queen 
Elizabeth, and then a prisoner in the Marshal- 
sea, which was within the diocese of Winches- 
ter : Bonner refuses to take it. Horn certifies 
his refusal into the King's Bench ; whereupon 
Bonner was indicted upon the statute. He prays 
judgment, whether, he might not give in evi- 
dence upon this issue, Quod ipse non est inde 
culpabilis, eo quod dictus episcopus de Winches- 
ter non fuit episcopus tempore oblationis sacra- 
menti. " That he was not culpable, because 
the said Horn, called bishop of Winchester, was 
not bishop when he tendered him the oath." And 
it was resolved by all the judges at Serjeants'- 
Inn, rh judge Cattlin, the chief justice's cham- 
ber, " that if the verity and matter be so, indeed, 
he should well be received to give in evidence 
upon this issue, and the jury should try it." 
Now, what the trial was, appears by that he was 
not condemned, nor ever any further trou- 
bled for that case, though he was a man espe- 
cially aimed at. And at the next sessions of 
that parliament, which was the 8th of Elizabeth, 
they were forced for want, you see, of a better 
character, to beg they might be declared bish- 
ops by act of parliament. 

Besides, it is no more credible, that such 
knowing and conscientious men, as Dr. Staple- 
ton, Dr. Harding, Constable, Kellison, &c. then 
living in England, and probably at London, 
would question so public and solemn an action, 

(c) See Abridg. of Dyer's Reports, foL 234. 



LAMBETH RECORDS. 



93 



than it is, than a sober man should now call in 
doubt kin<x James the Second's coronation at 
Westminster; or ask in print, who set the crown 
upon his head, pretending he had never been 
crowned. 

But in answer to these our objections : Dr. 
Bramhall falsely affirms, that the said records 
were spoken of in the eighth year of queen 
Elizabeth : for proof of which, he would gladly 
have the world so grossly to mistake the words 
of the statute of the 8th of Eliz. as to think that 
the mention there made of the records " of her 
majesty's father and brother's time, and also for 
her own time," have relation to their Lambeth 
Register : whereas by the records there spoken 
of, is understood only the records of her father's, 
brother's, and her own letters patent ; and not 
their then unknown Lambeth Register. 

But Dr. Bramhall, to make good his false as- 
sertion, and to impose upon the unwary reader, 
most egregiously falsifies the words of the said 
statute ; saying, " The statute speaks expressly 
of the records of elections, and confirmations, 
and consecrations :" (a) but you will find in the 
said statute, expressly these words : " As by her 
majesty's said letters patent, remaining on re- 
cord, more plainly will appear." Which, if, at- 
tentively considered, is sufficient to convince the 
reader, that " the records of her majesty's said 
father's and brother's time, and also of her own 
time," relate not to any records or registers of 
the archbishop of Canterbury ; but only to the 
records of the king's and queen's letters patent. 
This device of Bramhall is more fully answered 
and refuted by the author of the " Nullity of the 
Prelatical Clergy of England;" whither I will 
refer my reader. - 

Again, Protestants tell us further, (b) that 
there is a register of their bishops, found in a 
book called " Parker's Antiq uitates Britannica? ;"' 
which I deny not : but to this 1 answer, that the 
said register is forged and foisted into Parker's 
Antiq. Britan. For that edition, printed anno 
1605, is the first that ever mentioned any such 
thing : the old manuscript of that book, having 
no such register at all in it ; as a learned author 
(c) who diligently examined the same, affirms 
in these words : " In the old manuscript of that 
book, Park. Antiq. Brit., which I have seen, and 
diligently examined, there is not any mention or 
memorial at all of any such register or conse- 
cration of Mat. Parker, or any one of those pre- 
tended Protestant bishops, as the obtruded re- 
gister speaks of. And any man reading the 
printed book, will easily see, that it is a mere 
foisted and inserted thing ; having no connec- 
tion, correspondence, or affinity, either with 
that which goes before or follows ; and con- 
tains more things done after Mat. Parker had 
written that book." Yet this very register 



{a) In this statute is expressly mentioned her majes- 
ty's " father's and brother's letters patent ;" as also " her 
own remaining on record." 

(b) Antiq. Brit., edit. Hanov., 1605. 

(c) The author of a book, called, " The Judgment of 
t n e Apostles and first Age, in points of Doctrine," &c-, 
printed in the year 1G33. See pp. 209, 211, and 394. 

: . 13 



mentions not any certain place or form of their 
consecration ; so that it might be performed as 
well at the Nag's Head as at Lambeth. And 
indeed, we deny them not to have had a certain 
kind of puritanical consecration, by John Scorey, 
at the Nag's Head in Cheapside ; but we deny 
the said Nag's Head consecration to be either 
valid or legal, both for defect in the form, and 
in the minister, John Scorey himself being no 
bishop, no more than Barlow and Coverdale, as 
is hinted above, in page 53. By reason of which 
defects, the queen, it seems, was forced after- 
wards to declare, or make them bishops, by act 
of parliament. But to pass by these things, and 
to come to a closer examination of their Lam- 
beth Records : (d) 

Mr. Mason, the very first man that ever told 
us of this Lambeth Register, urges it in this 
manner: (e) " Queen Mary died in the year 
1558, the 17th of November ; the same day died 
cardinal Pool, archbishop of Canterbury ; and 
the very same day was queen Elizabeth pro- 
claimed. The 15th of January next following, 
was the day of queen Elizabeth's coronation, 
when Dr. Oglethorp, bishop of Carlisle, was so 
happy as to set the diadem of that kingdom upon 
her royal head. Now the see of Canterbury 
continued void till December following ; about 
which time the dean and chapter having received 
the conge d'elire, elected master Parker for their 
archbishop, juxta morem antiquum et laudabilem 
consuetudinem ecclesim pradicta: ab antiqua usita- 
tern et incussa observatam, proceeding in this 
election " according to the ancient manner, and 
the laudable custom of the aforesaid church ;" 
citing for these words, his new found register, 
ex Regist. Mat. Parker. " After which elec- 
tion, orderly performed, and signified according 
to the law, it pleased her highness to send her 
letters patent of commission, for his confirma- 
tion and consecration, to seven bishops ;" whose 
names, with as much of the commission as is 
necessary, he sets down ; after which he tells us, 
" That, to take away all scruple, he will faithfully 
deliver out of aitthentical records," as he calls 
them, putting in the margin ex Regist. M. Par- 
ker, with as much confidence as if they had then 
been made known to the world, and published or 
produced upon all occasions, for fifty years to- 
gether, before ever he spoke of them," both the 
day when he, Mr. Parker, was consecrated, and 
by whom, viz., 



Anno 1559. Mat. Park, 
Cant. cons. 17 Decemb. 
by 



( William Barlow, 
} John Scorey, 
\ Miles Coverdale, 
( John Hodgkins." 



These are Mr. Mason's obtruded records ; 
with which let us compare the words of another 
recorder, Dr. Bramhall, who, after having told 
us of Mat. Parker's being, by conge d'elire, 
eleeted archbishop of Canterbury, says : (/) 



(d) Stat. I., 8th Eliz. 

(e) Mason, lib. 3, p. 126. 
</) Bram. p. 83. 



9 I 



CONSIDERATIONS ON THE 



" The queen, accepting this election, was gra- 
ciously pleased to issue out two commissions for 
the legal confirmation of the said election, and 
consecration of the said archbishop ; the former 
dated the 9th of September, anno 1559, directed 
to six bishops ; Cuthbert, bishop of Durham ; 
Gilbert, bishop of Bath ; David, bishop of 
Peterborough; Anthony, bishop of Landaff; 
William Barlow, bishop ; and John Scorey, 
bishop." Which commission he sets down at 
large, from Ro., par. 2, 1 Eliz. Dated, Apud 
Redgrave, Nono die Septembris anno re.gni 
Elizabeths Anglce, tyc^ prima. 

Per breve de privato sigillo, 

Examinator, Ri. Broughton. 

Then he goes on : (a) " Now if any man de- 
sire a reason why this first commission was not 
executed, the best account I can give him is this, 
that it was directed to six bishops, without an 
" Aut minus, or at the least four of you ;"~so as 
if any one of the six were sick, or absent, or 
refused, the rest could not proceed to confirm or 
consecrate. And that some of them did refuse, 
I am very apt to believe, because three pf them, 
not long after, were deprived." Thus Dr. 
Bramhall. 

The three bishops, he means, that were, as 
he would have us believe, " shortly after de- 
prived," were Cuthbert Tunstal, bishop of Dur- 
ham ; Gilbert Bourn, bishop of Bath ; and David 
Pole, bishop of Peterborough. But according 
to John Stow, (b) and Hollinshead, these three 
bishops, with other ten or eleven, all Catholics, 
were deprived and deposed from their sees, in 
July before, for refusing the oath of supremacy. 
" In the month of July," says Stow, " the old 
bishops of England, then living, were called and 
examined by certain of the Queen's Majesty's 
council, where the bishops of York, Ely, and 
London, with others, to the number of thirteen 
or fourteen, for refusing to take the oath, 
touching the Queen's supremacy, and other 
articles, were deprived of their bishoprics." 
Hollinshead had also the same words, and tells 
us further who succeeded in their rooms and 
places." 

Hollinshead, in the praises of bishop Tunstal, 
of Durham, has these words : " He was, by the 
noble Queen Elizabeth, deprived of his bishop- 
ric, &c, and was committed to Matthew- Parker, 
bishop of Canterbury, who used him very hon- 
ourably, both for the gravity, learning, and age 
of the said Tunstal : but he, not long remaining 
under the ward^of the said bishop, did shortly 
after, the 18th of November, in the year 1559, 
depart this life at Lambeth, where he first re- 
ceived his consecration." By this it appears, 
that Matthew Parker was bishop of Canterbury, 
and lived in the bishop's palace at Lambeth, 
consequently installed in the bishopric, which 

{a) P. 85. 

(b) See John Stow and Hollinshed, in an. 1 Eliz. 



he could not be before he was consecrated, if 
consecration was then used ; and all this before 
the- 18th of November, 1559. 

And well might he, by this time, be in the 
full enjoyment and possession of the bishopric 
of Canterbury ; for by Stow and Hollinshead, 
we find him called bishop elect on the 9th of 
September, when he and others assisted at the 
king of France's obsequies. Yea, by Hollins- 
head, it evidently appears, that they were elected 
immediately, or, however, very shortly after the 
deprivation of the old Catholic bishops : for, on 
the 12th of August, we find Doctor Grindall 
not only called bishop elect, but exercising as 
much power, as if he had been more than only 
elect. His words are these : " On the 12th of 
August, being Saturday, the high altar in Paul's 
Church, with the rood, and the images of Mary 
and John, standing in the rood-loft, were taken 
down; and this was done by the command of 
Doctor Grindall, newly elected bishop of Lon- 
don." 

The truth of what I have here set down, from 
Hollinshead and Stow, is unquestionable : but 
if it agree not with Mr. Mason, and Doctor 
Bramhall, and their Lambeth Records, shall we 
not have just cause to reject these as forged 1 
But, before we compare them together, let us 
first see what accordance and agreement is 
found among the records and recorders them- 
selves. 

Firstly, in the queen's letters patent, or com- 
mission for consecrating Matthew Parker, (c) 
the suffragan bishop, there mentioned, is named 
Richard, suffragan of Bedford ; whereas by Mr. 
Mason and others, he is called John ; yea, 
Mason calls him John in one place, and Richard 
in another. I suppose those, who made these 
records, might be ignorant of the said suffragan's 
name ; and therefore for making sure work, calls 
him sometimes Richard, sometimes John ; but if 
these records had been made while the man 
himself was living, and when he imposed hands 
on Matthew Parker, he could have satisfied them 
of his true name, and the place where he was 
saffragan, viz., whether of Bedford or Dover! 
And whether there was any other suffragan 
there besides himself, if we suppose that the 
Lambeth notarius publicus could be ignorant of 
such circumstances. 

Secondly, Mr. Sutcliff affirms, that Parker 
was consecrated by Barlow, Coverdale, Scorey, 
and two suffragans. But by our pretended 
register, we find but one suffragan at that 
solemnity, (d) 

Thirdly, Mr. Mason, and his records, style 
him suffragan of Bedford ; but by Doctor Butler 
he is called suffragan of Dover, (e) 

Fourthly, in Mr. Mason, we hear tell but of 
one commission from the queen, for the confir- 
mation and consecration of Matthew Parker. 
But Bramhall, by more diligent search among 



(c) See D. Bram., pp. 87, 89, 90. 

(d) SutclifT against Dr. Kellison, p. 5. 
1 (e) Butler, Ep. de Consecrat. Minist. 



LAMBETH 

the records, finds two ; the first dated September 
the 9th. (a) 

Fifthly, by which commission it appears, 
Parker was elected before the 9th of Septem- 
ber : but Mr. Mason says, he was elected about 
the beginning of December. 

Thus they concur one with another : and to 
compare them with Richard Hollinshead, and 
John Stow's chronicles, they jump as exactly, as 
if the one had been written at China, and the 
other at Lambeth : for, 

Sixthly, Mr. Mason, I say, affirms, that the 
dean and chapter elected Doctor Matthew 
Parker about the month of December. But 
in Stow and Hollinshead, we find him and 
others called bishops elect, on the 9th of Sep- 
tember. Yea, seeing Hollinshead calls Grindall 
newly elect on the 12th of August, we may 
easily conclude, that Matthew Parker the metro- 
politan, was also elected before that time ; which, 
you see, is about four months before Mason's 
election by conge d'elire. 

Seventhly, Mr. Mason affirms, that the see of 
Canterbury continued void till December 1559. 
On the 17th of which month, according to the 1 
new register, Parker was consecrated. But 
in Hollinshead we find, that Matthew Parker 
was bishop of Canterbury; and lived in the 
bishop's place at Lambeth, where he had bishop 
Tunstal committed, prisoner, to his charge, long 
before the 17th of December : for on the J 8th 
of November, 1559, the said bishop Tunstal 
died. 

Eighthly, Doctor Bramhall, as is said, from 
our new-made records, brings us a commission, 
dated on the 9th of September, 1559. And 
directed, besides others, to three Catholic 
bishops, Cuthbert Tunstal, Gilbert Bourn, and 
David Pool, requiring them to confirm and 
consecrate Matthew Parker. And he has the 
confidence to affirm, that "the said three 
bishops were shortly after deprived of their 
bishoprics, as he is very apt to believe, for 
refusing to obey the said commission." But in 
Stow and Hollinshead we find; that the said 
three Catholic bishops, with ten or eleven 
others^ were deprived of their bishoprics in the' 
month of July before, for refusing the oath of 
supremacy ; and Mason himself confirms this, by 
acknowledging they were deprived not long 
after the feast of St. John the Baptist ; for 
which he also cites Saunders, lib de Schismate 
Angl. But pray consider, sirs, what can be 
more absurd, than to imagine that Queen 
Elizabeth would be beholden to such Roman 
Catholic bishops, as she had formerly deprived 
of their bishoprics, and made prisoners, for the 
confirming and consecrating of her new Protes- 
tant bishops, who were to be " unlawfully 
intruded" into their sees ; especially she having, 
as Bramhall says, Protestant bishops enough of 
her own ; or if such had been wanting, might, 
he says, have easily had store of bishops out of 
Ireland, to have done the work 1 

Pray give me leave to demand of our English 

(a) Bram., p. 83. 



RECORDS. 95 

!] prelates, why this first commission was by the 
|; queen directed to those three zealous Catholic 
li bishops, and not rather to her own Protestant 
[ bishops, to whom she directed the last commis- 
I sion, dated December 6 1 Her majesty was not 
ignorant that their consciences had been too 
tender to permit them to swear herself head of 
the Church of England : and that rather than 
gall their so tender consciences, they were con- 
tent to lose their bishoprics, and suffer perpetual 
imprisonment : could she, upon revolving this in 
her princely thoughts, easily imagine that they 
would, without all scruple, impose hands on her 
newly elected bishops, whom they knew to be 
of a religion as far different from themselves, 
as king Edward the Vlth was from queen 
Mary's? Could she suppose, that they would 
make bishops in that church, whereof themselves 
refused to be members ? Could she think, that 
those Catholic bishops would consecrate Parker, 
according to king Edward the Vlth's form of 
consecration, which they had in queen Mary's 
days declared to be invalid and null ; and which, 
at this time, was also illegal ? Or could the 
queen easily imagine, that Matthew Parker and 
the rest of her chosen bishops, who had stood 
so much upon their punctilios at Frankfort, 
would receive consecration by a form condemned 
as superstitious and antichristian ; and from 
which, as Mason says, they had pared away so 
many superfluities ; yea, so many, as even to 
pare out the very name, itself, of bishop ? Let 
the impartial reader consider these things. 

How our present pretended bishops them- 
selves will make all these things agree, will 
be hard to imagine ; which, if they cannot do, 
let them be content to leave us to our own 
liberties, and freedom of thought ; and to excuse 
us, if we freely affirm, that " Matthew Parker 
was never consecrated at Lambeth : that the 
said records are forged : and, that themselves 
are but mere laymen, without mission, without 
succession, and without consecration." 

Ninthly, it is none of the least objections 
against Parker's solemn consecration at Lam- 
beth, that we find it not once mentioned by the 
historians of those times, especially by John 
Stow, who professed so particular a kindness 
and respect for Parker ; and who was so exact 
in setting down all things, of far less moment, 
done about London. Doubtless, he omitted it 
not through negligence or forgetfulness, seeing 
he is not unmindful to set down the consecration 
of cardinal Pole, Parker's immediate prede- 
cessor, and the very day on which he said his 
first mass. Nor does it appear to have been 
through forgetfulness, that Hollinshead men- 
tions not this notorious Lambeth solemnity, 
seeing he tells us, that bishop Tunstal, who died 
under Parker's custody, " received his consecra- 
tion at Lambeth :" if either he or John Stow had 
but given us only such a short hint as this, of 
Parker's consecration at Lambeth, we should 
never have questioned it further, nor have 
doubted of the truth of it, though they had not 
been so exact to a hair in every punctilio, as to 
have told us of the chapel's being " adorned 



&6 



CONSIDERATIONS ON THE 



with tapestry towards the east ; a red cloth on 
the floor, in advent ; a sermon, communion, 
concourse of people ; Miles Coverdale's side 
woollen gown ; of the queen's sending to see if 
all things had been rightly performed." What 
care was here taken ? " Of answer being 
brought her, that there was not a little amiss, 
only Miles Coverdale was in his side woollen 
gown, at the very minute of the consecration : 
of their assuring her that that could not cause 
any defect in the consecration," &c, as our 
records mention ; which ridiculous circum- 
stances render them not a whit the more cre- 
dible, (a) 

If now, from what has been said, these 
Lambeth records appear evidently to be forged, 
to what other refuge will these pretenders to 
episcopacy have recourse for their episcopal 
character, but to queen Elizabeth's letters 
patent, and an act of parliment ? If so, I see 
no great reason why they should find fault with 
their ancient name and title of parliamentary 
bishops. Whoever read of bishops, between 
>St. Peter's time and Parker's, that stood in need 
of an act of parliament to declare them such ? 
Doubtless, if they had been consecrated at 
Lambeth by imposition of the hands of true 
bishops, though all their consecrators had been 
in side woollen gowns, and neither tapestry 
towards the east, nor red cloth on the floor of 
the chapel, and could have shown authentic 
records of the same, they would never have 
desired the queen to make and declare them 
bishops by act of parliament : nor would the 
queen, and the wisdom of the nation, have con- 
sented to the marking of such a superfluous 
act, if their reverences had desired it. No ! no ! 
there would have been no more need of any such 
act for them then, than there had been for 
three score and nine preceding archbishops of 
Canterbury. 

After all this, another query will yet arise ; 
to wit, by what form of consecration Matthew 
Parker was consecrated ? Our present prelates 
and clergy will not say, I suppose, that he was 
made bishop according to the Roman Catholic 
form, though queen Elizabeth had revived the 
act of 25 Henry VIII., 20, which authorized 
the same. Nor can they say that king Ed- 
ward the Vlth's form was then in being, in the 
eye of the law ; for that part of the act of 
Edward the Vlth which established the book of 
ordination, having been repealed by queen Mary, 
was not revived till six years after the pretended 
consecration of Matthew Parker, viz., till the 
8th of Elizabeth, as is easily proved. For 
whereas the act of 5th and 6th Edward VI., 1, 
consisted of two parts ; one, which authorized 
the book of common prayer, as it was then 
newly explained and perfected ; another which 
established the form of consecrated bishops, &c. 
and added to the book of common prayer. 
This act, as to both these parts, was repealed by 
queen Mary ; and this repeal was reversed by 

(a) Several ridiculous circumstances mentioned in the 
Records, which yet render them less credible. 



1 Elizabeth I., as to that part which concerned 
the book of common prayer only ; for so runs 
the act, " The said statute of repeal, and every 
thing therein contained, only, concerning the 
said book, viz. of common prayer, authorized 
by Edward VI. shall be void, and of no effect." 
And afterwards, 8th Elizabeth I. was revived 
that other part of it, which concerned the form 
of ordination, viz., in these words, " Such order 
and form for the consecrating of archbishops, 
bishops, &c, as was set forth in the time of 
Edward VI. and added to the said book of com- 
mon prayer, and authorized 5th and 6th of 
Edward VI. shall stand, and be in full force ; 
and shall from henceforth be used and observed," 
By which it is as clear as the sun at noon-day, 
that Edward the Vlth's form was not restored 
at all by 1 Elizabeth, either expressly or in 
general terms, under the name and notion of 
the book of common prayer, as Protestants 
would have it- thought. Nay rather, it was 
formally excluded by the said act, 1 Elizabeth. 
For that act of Edward VI. consisting of 
nothing else but the authorizing of the book 
of common prayer, and establishing, and adding 
to it the book of ordination; and the act of 
queen Mary having repealed that whole act, as to 
both these parts, that act of 1 Eliz. reversing that 
repeal, as to the book of common prayer only, 
did plainly and directly exclude the repealing of 
it, as to the book of ordination ; there being 
nothing else to be excluded, by that word only, 
but that book. So that it is undeniably evident, 
that king Edward the Vlth's form of consecra- 
tion was at that day illegal. And must we 
imagine, that the queen would suffer her new 
bishops to be consecrated by an illegal form, 
when she could as easily have authorized it by 
the law, as she had done the Roman form, by 
reviving the act 25th Henry VIII. 20th ? Yea, 
it had been as easy to make that form legal, as 
it was afterwards to declare them bishops by 
act of parliament ; and doubtless, more com- 
mendable. 

- But admit Matthew Parker, and the rest of 
queen Elizabeth's new bishops, were made such 
by this, then illegal, form ; yet, if this form 
prove invalid, they are but still where they were 
before jheir election, as to their character. 
And that it is invalid, is sufficiently and clearly 
proved by the learned author of Erastus Senior, 
to whom I will refer my reader. Yea, the 
Protestant bishops and clergy themselves have 
judged the said form to be invalid ; and there- 
fore thought necessary to repair the essential 
defects of the same, by adding the words bishop 
and priest. Essential defects, I call the want 
of these two words bishop and priest ; for if 
they had not been essential, why were they 
added ? Yet this will not serve their turn ; for 
before they can have a true clergy, they must 
change the character of the ordainers, as well 
as the form of ordination. A valid form of 
ordination, pronounced by a minister not validly 
ordained, gives no more character than if it had 
continued still invalid, and never been altered. 
The present Protestant bishops, who changed 



LAMBETH 

the form of their own consecration, upon their 
adversaries' objections of the invalidity thereof, 
(for immediately after Erastus Senior was pub- 
lished against it, they altered it, viz., anno 
1662,) might as well submit to be ordained by 
Catholic bishops ; or else, with the Presby- 
terians, utterly deny an episcopal character, as 
allow, by altering the form after so long a time 
and dispute, that it was not sufficient to make 
themselves, and their predecessors, priests and 
bishops. 

What has hitherto been said, concerning the 
nullity of their character, is yet further con- 
firmed by their altering the 25th of their 39 
Articles ; for these first bishops, Parker, Horn, 
Jewel, Grindall, &c, understanding the condi- 
tion in which they were, for want of consecra- 
tion by imposition of hands, resolved in their 
convocation, anno 1562, to publish the 39 
Articles, made by Cranmer and his associates, 
but with some alteration and addition ; especially 
to that Article wherein they speak of the sacra- 
ments : for, 

Whereas Cranmer's 25th or 26th Article says 
nothing of holy orders by imposition of hands, 
or any visible sign or ceremony required 
therein ; Parker, and his bishops, having taken 
upon themselves that calling, without any such 
ceremony of imposition and episcopal hands, for 
I believe they set not much by John Scorey's 
hands and Bible in the Nag's Head, declared, 
that " God ordained not any visible sign or 
ceremony for the five last, commonly called 
sacraments ;" whereof holy orders is one. This 
alteration and addition you may see in Doctor 
Heylin's appendix to Ecclesia Restauraia, page 
1 89. In this convocation they denied also holy 
orders to be a sacrament ; consequently not 
likely to impress any indelible character in the 
soul of the party ordained ; which doctrine con- 
tinued long among them, as appears by Mr. 
Rogers, in his defence of the 39 Articles, who 
affirms, that " none but disorderly Papists will 
say that order is a sacrament ;" and demands, 
" Where can it be seen in holy scripture, that 
orders or priesthood is a sacrament ? what form 
has it ? (says he) what promise ? what institution 
from Christ ?"(a) But after they began <to 
pretend to have received an episcopal character 
from Roman Catholic bishops, and to put out 
their Lambeth Records in defence of it, they 
disliked this doctrine, and taught the contrary, 
viz., that ordination is a sacrament. " We 
deny not ordination to be a sacrament," says 
Doctor Bramhall, " though it be not one of 
these two which are generally necessary to sal- 
vation."^) 

By order of this convocation the Bible of 
1562 was printed, where the aforesaid text, 
" When they had ordained to them priests," &c, 
was translated, " When they had ordained elders 
by- election ;" which, as soon as they began to 
thirst after the glorious character of priests and 
bishops, they corrected. 

{a) Defence of the Thirty-nine Articles, pp. 154, 155. 
(b) See Mason and Dr. Brain., p. 97. 



RECORDS. 97 

And though Cranmer cared as little for any 
visible signs, imposition of hands, or ceremonies 
in ordination, as the other first Protestant refor- 
mers, and according to their practice had 
abjured the priestly and episcopal character, 
which he had received among Catholics ; as may 
be gathered by his words, related by Fox in his 
degradation, thus : " Then a barber clipped his 
hair round about, and the bishop scraped the tops 
of his fingers, where he had been anointed. "(c) 
When they were thus doing ; " All this," quoth 
the archbishop, " needed not, I had myself done 
with this geer long ago." And also by his 
doctrine ; that, " In the New Testament, he 
that is appointed to be a priest or bishop, needs 
no confirmation by the scripture ; for election 
thereunto is sufficient." Though, I say, Cran- 
mer valued not any episcopal consecration, 
which he had received in the Catholic Church, 
yet he presumed not to make the denial thereof 
an article of the Protestant faith ; but queen 
Elizabeth's pretended bishops, and English 
Church, in their convocation 1562, seeing, they 
knew they had no episcopal character by impo- 
sition of true bishops' hands, thought fit, to 
make it a part of the Protestant belief, " That 
no such visible sign or ceremony was necessary, 
or instituted by Christ ;" and therefore con- 
cluded holy orders not to be a sacrament. And 
though, I say, the Church of England now 
teaches and practises the contrary, and in king 
James the First's reign erased from the text the 
word election as an imposture, or gross cor- 
ruption, yet this change of the matter does no 
more make them now true, priests and bishops, 
than their last change of the form of ordination, 
in the year 1 662, soon after the happy restoration 
of king Charles the Second. 

" Ecclesia non est, qua sacerdotem non habet. 

There can be no church without priests." — St. Jerom. 

It is enough, that in this place we have proved 
these men without consecration or ordination ; 
yet seeing they glory also in assuming to them- 
selves the name of pastors, pastor of St. Mar- 
tin's, &c, it may not be unseasonable to propose 
a few queries, touching their pastoral jurisdic- 
tion. 

1 . Whether it is not a power of the keys, to 
institute a pastor over a flock of clergy and 
people ? 

2. Whether any but a pastor can give pas- 
toral jurisdiction ? 

3. Whether any bishop, but the bishop of the 
diocese, or commissioned from him, or his 
superior, can validly institute a pastor to any 
parochial church, Avithin such a diocese ? 

4. Whether any number of bishops can validly 
confirm, or give pastoral jurisdiction to the 
bishop of any diocese, if the metropolitan, or 
some authorized by him, or his superior, be 
not one 1 

5. Or to the metropolitan of a province, if the 
(c) Fox's Acts and Monuments, fol. 216. 



98 PROTESTANT THAN 

primate of the nation, or some authorized by him, 
or his superior be not one ? 

6. Whether any but the chief patriarch of that 
part of the world, or authorized by him, can 
validly give pastoral jurisdiction to the primate 
of a nation ? 

7. Whether the bishop of Rome is not chief 
patriarch of the western church, consequently 
of this nation ? 

8. Whether Mat. Parker, the first Protestant 
pretended archbishop of Canterbury, received 
his pastoral jurisdiction from the bishop of 
Rome, or from others by him authorized ? 
or, 

9. Whether those who made Mat. Parker 
primate of England, or archbishop of Canter- 
bury, had any jurisdiction to that act, but what 
they received from queen Elizabeth? 

10. Whether queen Elizabeth had the power 
of the keys, either of order or jurisdiction ? 

1 K Whether it is not an essential part of the 
Catholic Church to have pastors ? 

12, Whether salvation can be had in a church 
wanting pastors ? 



ISfcATION AGAINST 

13. Whether they do not commit a most 
heinous sacrilege, who having neither valid 
ordination, nor pastoral jurisdiction, do notwith- 
standing take upon them to administer sacra- 
ments, and exercise all other acts of episcopal 
and priestly functions ? 

1 4. Whether the people are not also involved 
with them, in the same sin, so often as they 
communicate with them in, or co-operate to, 
those sacrilegious presumptions ? 

1 5. Whether those, who assume to themselves 
the names and offices of bishops and priests, 
take upon them to teach, preach, administer 
sacraments, and perforin all other episcopal and 
priestly functions, without vocation, without 
ordination, without consecration, without suc- 
cession, without mission, or without pastoral 
jurisdiction, are not the very men of whom our 
blessed Saviour charged us to beware ? (a) 

1G. To conclude, whether it is wisdom in the 
people of England, to hire such men at the 
charge of perhaps above £\ ,000,000 [query, now 
3 or £4,000,000 ?] per annum, to lead them the 
broad way to perdition ? 



ANOTHER CORRUPT ADDITION AGAINST THE PERPETUAL SACRIFICE OF 

CHRIST'S BODY AND BLOOD. 



Protestants teach, in the 31st of the 39 
Articles, " That the offering of Christ once made, 
is that perfect redemption, propitiation and 
satisfaction for all the sins of the whole world, 
&c. Wherefore the sacrifice of masses, in 
which it was commonly said, that the priests did 
offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have 
remission of pain and guilt, were blasphemous 
fables, and dangerous deceits." By this doctrine 
the Church of England bereaves Christians of 
the most inestimable jewel and richest treasure, 
that ever Christ our Saviour left to his church ; 
to wit, the most, holy and venerable sacrifice of 
his sacred body and blood in the mass, which is 
daily offered to God the Father, for a propitia- 
tion for our sins. And because they would 
have this false and erroneous doctrine of their's 
backed by sacred scripture, they most egregiously 
corrupt the text, Heb. x. 10, by adding to the 
same two words not found in the Greek or 
Latin copies, viz., " For all ;" the apostle's words 
being, " In the which will we are sanctified by 
the oblation of the body of Jesus Christ once ;" 
which they corruptly read, in their last transla- 
tion : " By the which will we are sanctified, 
through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ 
once, for all." By which addition they endea- 
vour to take away the daily oblation of the 
body and blood of Christ in the holy sacrifice 
of the mass ; contradicting the doctrine of God's 
holy church, which believes and teaches, " that 
our Lord God, although he was once to offer 
himself to God the Father upon the altar of the 
cross by death, that he might there work eternal 
redemption ; yet because his priesthood was not 
to be extinguished by death, in the last supper, 



which night he was to be betrayed, that he might 
leave a visible sacrifice to his beloved spouse the 
church, whereby that bloody one, once to be 
performed upon the cross, should be represented, 
and the memory thereof should remain to the 
end of the world, and the wholesome virtue 
thereof should be applied for the remission of 
those sins which we daily commit, declaring 
himself to be ordained a priest for e-ver, ac- 
cording to the order of Melchizedek, he offered 
to God the Father his body and blood, under 
the forms of bread and wine ; and under the 
signs of the same things he gave it to the apos- 
tles, whom then he ordained priests of the New 
Testament, that they should receive it ; and by 
the words he commanded them, and their suc- 
cessors in the priesthood, that they should offer 
it : " Do ye this in commemoration of me," &c. 
And, " Because in this divine sacrifice, which 
is performed in the mass, the self-same Christ is 
contained, and unbloodily offered, who offered 
himself once bloodily upon the altar of the cross : 
the holy synod teaches the sacrifice to be truly 
propitiatory, &c. Wherefore, according to the 
tradition of the apostles, it is duly offered, not 
only for the sins, punishments, satisfactions, and 
other necessities of the faithful that are living, 
but also for such as are dead in Christ, as not yet 
fully purged. "(b) This is the Catholic doc- 
trine, delivered in the sacred Council of Trent, 
which the Church of England calls blasphemous 
fables, and dangerous deceits ; and against 
which they falsify the sacred text of scripture, 

(«) Mat. vii. 15. 

(&) Concil, Trid.,sess. 22, cap. 1, cap. 2. 



THE PERPETUAL SACRIFICE. 



99 



by thrusting into it words of their own, which 
they find not in any of the Greek or Latin 
copies. 

But lest they may object, that this is but a 
new doctrine, not taught in the primitive church, 
nor delivered down to us by the apostles or by 
apostolical tradition ; I will give you these fol- 
lowing testimonies from the fathers of the first 
five hundred years. 

St. Cyprian says, (a) "Christ is priest for 
ever, according to the order of Melchizedek, 
which order is this, coming from this sacrifice, 
and thence descending^ that Melchizedek was 
priest of God most high, that he offered bread 
and wine, that he blessed Abraham ; for who is 
more a priest of God most high, than our Lord 
Jesus Christ, who offered sacrifice to God the 
Father, and offered' the same that Melchizedek 
had offered, bread and wine, viz., his body and 
blood ?" 

And a little after : " That therefore in Gene- 
sis the blessing might be rightly celebrated about 
Abraham by Melchizedek the priest, the image, 
or figure of Chrst's sacrifice, consisting in 
bread and wine, went before : which thing our 
Lord perfecting and performing, offered bread, 
and the chalice mixed with wine, and he, that is 
the plenitude, fulfilled the verity of the prefi- 
gured image." 

The same holy father, in another place, as 
cited also by the Magdeburgian Centurists, (b) 
in this manner, " Our Lord Jesus Christ," says 
Cyprian, lib. 2, ep. 3, " is the high priest of 
God the Father ; and first offered sacrifice to God 
the Father, and commanded the same to be done 
in rememberance to him ; and that priest truly 
executes Christ's place, who imitates that which 
Christ did ; and then he offers in the church a 
true and full sacrifice to God." This saying so 
displeases the Centurists, that they say, " Cy- 
prian affirms superstitiously, that the priest 
executes Christ's place in the supper of our 
Lord." 

St. Hierom : (c) Have recourse," says he, 
" to the book of Genesis, and you shall find 
Melchizedek, king of Salem, prince of this city, 
who even there, in figure of Christ, offered 
bread and wine, and dedicated the Christian 
mystery in our Saviour's body and blood." 
Again, " Melchizedek offered not bloody vic- 
tims, but dedicated the sacrament of Christ in 
bread and wine, a simple and pure sacrifice." 
And yet more plainly in another place, " Our 
ministry," says he, " is signified in the word of 
order, not by Aaron, in immolating brute vic- 
tims, but in offering bread and wine, that is, the 
body and blood of our Lord Jesus." 

St. Augustine expressly teaches, that " Mel- 
chizedek bringing forth the sacrament, or 
mystery, of our Lord's table, knew how to 
figure his eternal priesthood." (d) " There 

(a) Ep. 53, ad Ccecilium. 

(b) In the Alphab. Table of the Third Cent., under the 
letter S., col. 83. 

(c) Ep. ad Marcel, ut migret. Bethleera. ; Ep. ad Evagr. 
Q.uaest. in Gen., c. 14. 

(d) Ep. 95. 



first appeared," says he in another place, "that 
sacrifice which is now offered to God by Chris- 
tians, in the whole world." [e) 

Again, (Cone. 1, in Psal. xxxv.) "There was 
formerly," says he, " as you have known, the 
sacrifice of the Jews, according to the order of 
Aaron, in the sacrifice of beasts, and this in 
mystery ; for not as yet was the sacrifice of the 
body and blood of our Lord, which the faithful 
know, and such as have read the Gospel ; which 
sacrifice now is spread over the whole world. 
Set therefore before your eyes two sacrifices, 
that according to the order of Aaron ; and this, 
according to the order of Melchizedek ; for it is 
written, our Lord has sworn, and it shall not 
repent him, thou art a priest for ever, according 
to the order of Melchizedek." And in Cone. 
2, Psal. xxxiii., he expressly teaches, "that 
Christ, of his body and blood, instituted a sacri- 
fice, according to the order of Melchizedek." 

Nothing can be more plain than these words 
of St. Irenaeus, in which he affirms of Christ, 
If) " Giving counsel also to his disciples, to 
off er the first fruits of his creatures to God ; not 
as it were needing it, but that they might be 
neither unfruitful nor ungrateful, he himself 
took of the creature of bread, and gave thanks, 
saying, this is my body ; and likewise the chalice, 
he confessed to be his blood, which is made of 
that creature which is in use amongst us, and 
taught a new oblation of the New Testament, 
which oblation the church receiving from the 
apostles, throughout the whole world, offers to 
God, to him who gives us nourishment, the first 
fruits of his gifts in the New Testament ; of 
whom, amongst the twelve prophets, Malachy 
has thus foretold: 'I have no will in you, the 
Jews, says our omnipotent Lord, and I will 
take no sacrifices at your hands, because, from 
the rising of the sun to the setting thereof, my 
name is glorified amongst the Gentiles ; and in 
every place, incense is offered to my name, and 
a pure sacrifice, because my name is great 
among the Gentiles, saith our Lord Almighty,' 
manifestly signifying by these things, because 
the former people indeed ceased to offer to God ; 
bul in every place a sacrifice is offered to God, and 
this pure, for his name is glorified among the 
Gentiles." Thus St. Irenaeus, whose words so 
touch the Protestant Centurists, that they say, 
" Irenaeus, &c, seems to speak very incommo- 
diously, when he says, he, Christ, taught the 
new oblation of the New Testament, which the 
church receiving from the apostles, offered to 
God over all the world." 

Eusebius Caesariensis : (g) "We sacrifice, 
therefore, to our highest Lord a sacrifice of 
praise ; we sacrifice to God a full, odoriferous, 
and most holy sacrifice ; we sacrifice after a new 
manner, according to the New Testament, a 
pure host." 

St. John Chrysostom expounding the words of 

0) Lib. 10, de Civ. Dei, c. 22. See him also lib. 17, c. 17, 
and lib. 18, c. 35; cum Psalm cix., lib. 1, contr. Advers. 
Leg. et Prophet, c. 20: Serm. 4, de Sanctis Innocentibus. 

(/) Lib. 4, Advers. ILer., c. 32. 

(g) Lib. 1, Demonstrat. Evan., c. 10. 



100 PROTESTANT THAN 

the prophet Malachy, says, (a) " The church, 
which every where carries about Christ in it, is 
prohibited from no place ; but in every place there 
are altars, in every place doctrines ; these things 
God foretold by his prophet, for both declaring 
the Ghurch's sincerity, and the ingratitude of the 
other people, the Jews, he tells them, I have no 
pleasure in you, &c. Mark, how clearly and 
plainly he interprets the mystical table, which is 
the unbloody host, and the pure perfume he calls 
holy prayers, which are offered after the host. 
Thou seest how it is granted, that that angelical 
sacrifice should every where be known ; thou 
seest it is circumscribed with no limits, neither 
the altars, nor the song. In every place incense 
is offered to my name ; therefore the mystical 
table, the heavenly and exceedingly venerable 
sacrifice is indeed the prime pure host." 

Is it not a thing to be admired, that the 
Church of England should not only corrupt the 
sacred scriptures against the great and most 
dreadful sacrifice ; but should also make it an 
article of her faith, that it is a blasphemous 
fable, and dangerous deceit? When, without 
all doubt, she cannot be ignorant, that the holy 
fathers call it : (b) " A visible sacrifice ; (c) 
" The sacrifice ;" (d) " The daily sacrifice ;" 
(«) " The true sacrifice according to the order of 
Melchizedek ;" (/) "The sacrifice of the body 
and blood of Christ ;" (g) " The sacrifice of the 
altar ;" (h) " The sacrifice of the church ; (/) 
"The sacrifice of the New Testament;" (k) 
" Which succeeded to all sacrifices of the Old 
Testament." And that it was offered for the 
health of the emperor, Sacrificamus pro salute im- 
peratoris," says Tertullian, de Scapul. c. 2. That 
it was offered for the sick, Pro infirmis etiam sac- 
rificamus, says St. Chrysostom, Horn. 27, in Act 
Apos. " For those upon the sea, and for the fruits 
of the earth," idem. And for the purging of houses 
infected with wicked spirits. St. Aug. de Civit. 
Die, lib. 22, c. 8, says, that " One went and of- 
fered," in the house infected, " the sacrifice of 
Christ's body, praying that the vexation might 
cease, and by God's mercy it ceased immediately." 

In the first Council of Nice, can. 14, we find 
these words : " The holy council has been in- 
formed, that in some places and cities the dea- 
cons distribute the sacrament to priests ; neither 
rule nor custom has delivered, that they who 
have not power to offer sacrifice, should distri- 
bute the body of Chris* to them who offer." 
See also, concil. 3, Bracarense. can. 3, and 

(a) Ad. Psal. xcv. 

(b) St. Agu., de Civit. Dei, lib. 10, c. 19. 

(c) St. Cypr. 1. 2, ep. 3 ; et St. Agu. Cit. c. 20. 

(d) Aug. Cit. c. 16, et. Cone. Tolet., 1. can. 5 ; Origen. in 
Num. Horn. 23. 

(e) St. Cyprian, 1. 2, ep. 3, et Aug., lib. 16, c. 22, de 
Civit. Dei. 

(/) Et lib. 22, c. 8, et lib. 20, contr. Faustum, c. 18 ; et 
S. Hierom., lib. 3, contr. Pelag.; Aucr. in Psal. xxxiii, con. 
2, to. 8; etSt. Crys., lib. 1, Cor. Horn. 24. 

(g) S.Aug, in Enchiridion, c. 110, et de Cura pro Mor- 
tuis, c. 18. 

(h) Et de Civit. Dei, 1. 10, c. 20. 

(i) Et de Gratia Novi Test., c. 18, et S. Irenaeus, lib. 4, 
c. 32. 

(£) Aug de Civit. Dei, lib. 17, c. 20.; St. Clement, in 
Apost. Constit., edit. 1564, Antverpiae, lib. 6, c. 22, fol. 123. 



SLATION AGAINST 

concil. 12, can. 5. Moreover that "this holy 
sacrifice," as God's church at this day teaches 
and practises, " was offered for the sins of the 
living and dead," is a truth so undeniable, that 
Crastoius, a learned Protestant, in his book of 
the mass, against Bellarmin, page 167, repre- 
hends Origen, St. Athanasius, St. Ambrose, 
St. Chrysostom, .St. Augustine, St Gregory 
the Great, and venerable Bede, for maintaining 
" the mass to be a propitiatory sacrifice for the 
sins of the living and of the dead." Consider 
then, what truth there is in the words of that 
author (I) who affirms, that in Gregory the 
Great's time, " Masses for the dead were not 
intended to deliver souls from those torments of 
purgatory." Doubtless he considered not the 
words of St. Augustine, lib. 9, Confess, c. 12, 
and De Verb. Apost. Serm. 34, viz. " That the 
sacrifice of our price was offered for his mother 
Monica, being dead," and, " That the universal 
church does observe, as delivered from their 
forefathers, to pray for the faithful deceased in the 
sacrifice, and also to offer the sacrifice for them." 
Nor considered this great vindicator, that great 
miracle related by St- Gregory the Great, him- 
self, concerning purgatory, and the benefits souls 
there receive, by the offering up of this propitia- 
tory sacrifice. In his fourth Book of Dialogues, 
chap. 55, telling us of a monk called Justus, who 
was obsequious to him, and watched with him in 
his daily sickness: "This man," says he, "being 
dead, I appointed the healthful host to be offered 
for his absolution thirty days together, which 
done, the said Justus appeared to his brother by 
vision, and said, I have been hitherto evil, but 
now am well, &c " And the brethren in the mon- 
astery counting the days, found that to be the day 
on which the 30th oblation was offered for him. 

Nor would doubtless this vindicator have told 
us, " That transubstantiation was yet unborn," 
to wit, in St. Gregory the Great's time, unless he 
had a mind to impose upon his reader, if he had 
ever read the doctrine of those fathers, who 
lived before St. Gregory's time, for example : 

St. Ignatius, martyr, in his epistle to the 
people of Smyrna, speaking of the heretics of 
his time, men of the same judgment with this 
vindicator, writes thus: " They allow not of 
eucharists and oblations," says he, " because 
they do not believe the eucharist to be the flesh 
of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for 
our sins, and which the Father, in his mercy, 
raised again from the dead." 

St. Justin, martyr, in his apology to the em- 
peror Antonius Pius, made for the Christians : 
" Now this food," says he, " amongst us, is called 
the eucharist, which it is lawful for none to par- 
take of, but those who believe our doctrine to be 
true, who have been washed in the laver of rege- 
neration for the remission of sins ; and who regu- 
late their lives according to the prescription of 
Christ; for jwe do not receive this as common 
bread, or common drink ; but as by the word of 
God, Jesus Christ, our Redeemer, being made 

(I) The author of the Second Defence of the Exposition 
of the Doctrine of the Church of England, &c, p. 13. 



THE PERPETUAL SACRIFICE. 



101 



flesh, had both flesh and blood for the sake of 
our salvation ; just so we are taught, that that 
food, over which thanks are given by prayers, in 
his own words, and whereby our blood and flesh, 
are by a change, nourished, is the flesh and blood 
of the incarnate Jesus ; for the apostles, in the 
commentaries written by them, called the gos- 
pel, have recorded that Jesus so commanded 
them." 

St. Irenaeus, taking an argument from the 
participation of the eucharist, proves the resur- 
rection of the flesh, against the heretics of his 
time, (a) " As the blessed apostles say : ' Be- 
cause we are members of his body, of his flesh, 
and of his bones ;' not speaking this of any 
spiritual or invisible man, but of that disposition 
which belongs to a real man, that consists of 
flesh, nerves, and bones ; and is nourished by 
the chalice, which is his (Christ's) blood, and 
receives increase by that bread which is his body. 
And as the vine, being planted in the earth, 
brings forth fruit in season : and a grain of 
wheat falling upon the ground, and rotting, rises 
up with increase by the virtue of God, who com- 
prehends all things, which afterwards, by a pru- 
dent management, becomes serviceable to men ; 
and receiving the word of God, are made the 
eucharist, which is the body and blood of Christ ; 
so also our bodies being nourished by it, and 
laid in the earth, and there dissolved, will rise 
at their time ; the word of God working in them 
this resurrection, to the glory of God the 
Father." 

Eusebius Caesariensis : (b) " Making a daily 
commemoration of him (Christ,) and daily cele- 
brating the memory of his body and blood ; and 
being now preferred to a more excellent sacri- 
fice and office than that of the old law, we think 
it unreasonable any more to fall back to those 
first and weak elements which contained certain 
signs and figures, but not the truth itself." 
Another place of Eusebius, as quoted by St. 
John of Damascene : " Many sinners," says he, 
" being priests, do offer sacrifice ; neither does 
God deny his assistance, but by the Holy Ghost 
consecrates the proposed gifts. And the bread 
indeed is made the precious body of our Lord, 
and the cup his precious blood."(c) 

St. Hilary : " We must not speak," says he, 
" of the things of God, like men, or in the sense 
of the world : let us read what is written, and 
understand what we read, and then we shall be- 
lieve with a perfect faith. For what we say of 
the natural existence of Christ within us, if we 
do not learn from him, we say foolishly and 
profanely ; for he himself says : 1 My flesh is 
meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.' 
There is no place left for doubting of the reality 
of his flesh and blood ; for now, by the profes- 
sion of Christ himself, and by our faith, it is 
truly flesh, and truly blood. Is not this truth ? 
It may indeed not be true for them, who deny 
Christ to be true God."(<f) 

(a) Lib. 5, c. 11. 

(b) Lib. 1, de Demonstrat. Evang., c. 10- 

(c) Lib. 3, Parallel., c. 45. 

(d) Lib. 8, de Trinitate, 

14 



St. Cyril of Jerusalem :(*) " Since, therefore, 
Christ himself does thus affirm, and says of the 
bread, ' This is my body ;' who, from hence- 
forward, dare be so bold as to doubt of it ? 
And since the same (Christ) does assure us, and 
say : ' This is my blood ;' who, I say, can doubt 
of it, and say, it is not his blood ? In Cana of 
Galilee he once, with his sole will, turned water 
into wine, which much resembles blood ; and 
does not he deserve to be credited, that he 
changed wine into his blood ; for if, when in- 
vited to a corporal marriage, he wrought so stu- 
pendous a miracle, have we not much more 
reason to confess, that he gave his body and 
blood to the children of the bridegroom ? 
Wherefore, full of certainty, let us receive the 
body and blood of Christ ; for under the form 
of bread is given to thee the body, and the blood 
under the form of wine ; that having received 
the body and blood of Christ, thou mayest be 
made partaker with him of his body and blood. 
Thus we shall become Christophers, that is, 
' bearers of Christ,' receiving his body and 
blood into us. Do not, therefore, look on it as 
mere bread only, or bare wine ; for, as God 
himself has said, it is the body and blood of 
Christ. Notwithstanding therefore, the infor- 
mation of sense, let faith confirm thee ; and do 
not judge of the thing by the taste, but rather 
take it for most certain by faith, without the 
least doubt that his body and blood are given 
thee- When you come to communion, do not 
come holding both the palms of your hands open, 
nor your fingers spread ; but let your left hand 
be as it were a rest under the right, into which 
you are to receive so great a King ; and in the 
hollow of your hand take the body of Christ, 
saying, amen."(/) 

St. Gregory Nyssen :(g) "When we have 
eaten any thing that is prejudicial to our consti- 
tution, it is necessary that we take something 
that is capable of repairing what was impaired ; 
that so, when this healing antidote is within us, 
it may work out of the body, by a contrary 
affection, all the force of the poison. And 
what is this antidote ? It is nothing but that 
body which overcame death, and was the origin 
of our life. For, as the apostle tells us, as a 
little leaven makes the whole lump like itself, so 
that body which, by God's appointment, suffered 
death, being received within our body, changes 
and reduces the whole to its own likeness. And 
as when poison is mixed up with any thing that 
is medicinal, the whole compound is rendered 
useless ; so likewise that immortal body being 
within him that receives it, converts the whole 
into its own nature. But there being no other 
way of receiving any thing within our body 
unless it be first conveyed into our stomach by 
eating or drinking, it is necessary that by this 
ordinary way of nature, the life-giving virtue of 
the Spirit be communicated to us. But now, 
since that body alone, which was united to the 

(e) In Catechis. 

(/) It was the custom in those days for the priest to de- 
liver the holy sacrament into the hands of the communicant. 
(g) In Orat. Cat., c. 37- 



102 PROTESTANT 

Divinity, has received this grace, and it is mani- 
fest that our body can no otherwise become im 
mortal, we are to consider how it is impossible, 
that one body, which is always distributed to so 
many thousand Christians over the whole world, 
should be the whole, by a part in every one, and 
still remain whole in itself." 

And a little after : " I do, therefore, now 
rightly believe, that the bread sanctified by the 
word of God is changed into the body of God 
the Word. And here likewise the bread, as 
the apostle says, is sanctified by the word of 
God and prayer : not so, that by being eaten it 
becomes the body of the Word, but because it is 
suddenly changed by the word into his body, 
by these words : ' This is my body.' And this 
is effected by virtue of the benediction, by which 
the nature of those things which appear is 
transelemented into it." 

Again, in another place :(a) " And the bread 
in the beginning is only common bread ; but 
when it is sanctified by the mystery, it is made 
and called the body of Christ." 

St. Hierom : " God forbid," says he, " that 
I should speak detractingly of these men, 
(priests,) who, by succeeding the apostles in 
their function, do make the body of Christ 
with their sacred mouth. "(i) 

St. Augustine : " We have heard," says he, 
" our Master, who always speaks truth, our di- 
vine Redeemer, the Saviour of men, recom- 
mending to us our ransom, his blood ; for he 
spake of his body and blood ; which body he 
called meat and which blood he called drink. 
The faithful understand the sacrament of the 
faithful." " But there are some," says he, 
" who do not believe ; they said : ' This is an 
hard saying, who can hear him ?" It is an hard 
saying but to those Avho are obstinate ; that is, 
it is incredible but to the incredulous."(e) 



CORRUPTIONS 

The same holy father and great doctor, in his 
commentary upon the Thirty-third Psalm, 
speaks thus of Christ : " And he was carried in 
his own hands ? And can this, brethren, be 
possible in man 1 Was ever any man carried 
in his own hands ? He may be carried by the 
hands of others, but in his own no man was 
ever yet carried. How this can be literally un- 
derstood of David, we cannot discover ; but in 
Christ we find it verified ; for Christ was car- 
ried in his own hands, when giving his own very 
body, he said : ' This is my body ;' for that body 
he carried in his own hands." Such is the 
humility of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is 
much recommended to men. How plain and 
positive are the words of these ancient and holy 
fathers, for the real presence of Christ's body 
and blood in the blessed sacrament of the 
eucharist, which Protestants so flatly deny ? I 
would ask our Church of England divines, 
whether, if they had been present among the 
apostles when Christ said : " Take and eat, this 
is my body," they durst have assumed the bold- 
ness to have contradicted the omnipotent Word, 
and have replied : " It is not thy body, Lord, it 
is only bread V I believe the most stiff sacra- 
mentarian in England would have trembled to 
have made such a reply ; though now they dare, 
with blasphemous mouth, call the doctrine of 
transubstantiation, the "mystery of iniquity." 

I have insisted somewhat longer upon these 
two points than, perhaps, the reader may think 
proper for this treatise ; but when he considers 
that the priesthood and sacrifice, against which 
Protestants have corrupted the scripture, and 
framed their new articles of faith, are two such 
essential parts of Christian religion, that if either 
of them be taken away, the whole fabric of 
God's church falls to the ground, he will not 
look upon it as an unnecesary digression. 



SEVERAL OTHER CORRUPTIONS AND FALSIFICATIONS 

NOT MENTIONED UNDER THE FOREGOING HEADS. 



This Treatise increasing beyond what indeed 
I designed it at first, will oblige me to as much 
brevity as possible, in these following corrup- 
tions : 

In Romans viii. 39, instead of the word " cha- 
rity," they, contrary to the Greek, translate 
" love ;" and so generally in all places, where 
much is spoken in commendation of charity. 
The reason is, because they attribute salvation 
to faith alone, they care not how little charity 
may sound in the ears of the people. So like- 
wise in 1 Cor. xiii. for " charity," they eight 
times say "love." In Rom. ix. 16, for this 
text : " Therefore it is not of the wilier, nor 
the runner, but of God that showeth mercy," 

(a) In Orat. in diem Luminum. 

(b) In Epist. ad Helibdorum. 

(c) Lib. de Verb. Apost. Serm. 



they translate in their old Bibles : " So lieth it 
not then in a man's will or running, but in the 
mercy of God ;" changing of, into in, and 
wilier and runner, into will and running ; and 
so make the apostle say, that it is not at all in 
man's will to consent or co-operate with God's 
grace and mercy. 

In 1 Corinthians i. J 0, for " schisms," which 
are spiritual divisions from the unity of the 
church, they translate " dissensions," which may 
be in worldly things, as well as religion ; this 
is done because themselves were afraid to be 
accounted schismatics. So likewise 

In Galatians v. 20, for "heresy," as it is in 
the Greek, they translate " sects," in favour of 
themselves, being charged with heresy ; also 

In Titus iii. 10, instead of saying, according 
to the Greek, " A man that is an heretic, 
&c, their Bible of 1662 translates, "A man 



OF THE SCRIPTURE. 



103 



that is author of sects ;" favouring that name for 
their own sakes, and dissembling it as though 
the holy scripture spake not against heresy or 
heretics, schism or schismatics. 

In 1 Tim. iii. 6, for a " neophyte," (one lately 
baptized or planted in Christ's mystical body,) 
they translate in their first Bibles, " a young 
scholar ;" as though an old scholar could not be 
a neophyte, by deferring his baptism, or by long 
delaying his conversion to God, which he learn- 
ed to be necessary long before. 

In Titus iii. 8, instead of these words, " to 
excel in good works," they translate, " to show 
forth good works ;" and, as their last edition has 
it, " to maintain good works ;" against the dif- 
ferent degrees of good works. 

In Hebrews x 20, for " dedicated," they 
translate, in their first Bibles, " prepared," in 
favour of their heresy, that Christ was not the 
first who went into heaven, which the word dedi- 
cated signifies. 

In the two Epistles of Peter, iii. 16, they 
force the text to maintain a frivolous evasion, 
that " St. Paul's Epistles are not hard," but the 
" things in the epistles ;" whereas both the 
Greek and Latin texts are indifferent with regard 
to both constructions. It is a general custom 
of theirs, and where they find the Greek text 
indifferent to two senses, there they restrain 
it only to that which may be most advantage- 
ous to their own error, thereby excluding its 
reference to the other sense. And often- 
times, where one sense is received, read, and 
expounded by the greater part of the ancient 
fathers, and by all the Latin church, there they 
very partially follow the other sense, not so 
generally received. 

In St. James i. 13, for " God is not a tempter 
of evils," they translate, " God is not tempted 
with evils," and " God cannot be tempted with 
evils," (a) than which nothing is more imper- 
tinent to the apostle's speech in that place. Why 
is it that they refuse to say, " God is not tempted 
to evil," as well as the other 1 is it on account 
of the Greek word, which is passive 1 They 
may find in their lexicon, that it is both an active 
and passive ; as also appears by the very cir- 
cumstance of the foregoing words, " Let no man 
say, that he is tempted by God." Why so ? 
" Because," says the Protestant translators, 
" God is not tempted with evil." Is this a good 
reason ? nothing less. How then 1 " Because, 
God is not tempted to evil ;" therefore let no 
man say, that " he is tempted by God." 

This reason is so coherent, and so necessary 
in this place, that if the Greek word were only 
a passive, as it is not, yet it might have better 
beseemed Beza to translate it actively, than it 
did to turn an active into a passive, against the 
real presence, as himself confesses he did with- 
out scruple. But though he might and ought to 
have translated this word actively, yet he would 
not, because he would favour his own heresy ; 
which, quite contrary to these words of the 
apostle, says, that " God is a tempter to evil ;" his 



words are, Inducit Dominus in tentationem eos 
quos satancB arbitrio permiltet, &c. (b) " The 
Lord leads into temptation those whom he per- 
mits to be at satan's disposal ; or, into whom 
rather he leads or brings in satan himself, to fill 
their hearts, as Peter speaketh." Note, that he 
says, God brings satan into a man to fill his 
heart, as Peter said to Ananias : " Why has 
satan filled thy heart, to lie unto the Holy 
Ghost ?" So that by this doctrine of Beza, God 
brought satan into Anania's heart to make him 
lie unto the Holy Ghost ; and so leading him 
into temptation, was author and cause of that 
henious sin. 

Is not this to say, " God is a tempter to evil," 
quite contrary to St. James's words 1 Or could 
he that is of this opinion, translate the contrary ; 
to wit, that " God is no tempter to evil ?" Is not 
this as much as to say, that God also brought 
satan into Judas to fill his heart, and so was 
author of Judas's treason, even as he was of 
Paul's conversion ? Is not this a most absurd 
and blasphemous opinion ? Yet how can they 
free themselves from it, who allow and maintain 
the aforesaid exposition of " God's leading into 
temptation ?" Nay, Beza, for maintaining the 
same, translates, " God's providence," instead 
of " God's prescience," Acts ii. 23, a version so 
false, that the English Bezaites, in their transla- 
tion, are ashamed to follow him. 

And which is worse than all this, if worse can 
be, they make God not only a leader of men into 
temptation, but even the author and worker of 
sin : yea, that God created or appointed men to 
sin ; as appears too plainly, not only in their 
translation of this following text of St. Peter's, 
but also from Beza's commentary on the same. 
Also Bucer, one of king Edward the Vlth's 
apostles, held directly, that " God is the author 
of sin." (c) 

St. Peter says of the Jews, that Christ is to 
them, Pctra scandali qui offendunt verbo nec 
credunt in quo et posili sunt, eT? o xat hi&eaav ; 
that is, " A rock of scandal to them (the Jews) 
that stumble at the word, neither do believe 
wherein also they are put," as the Rhemish 
Testament translates it : or as it is rendered in 
king Edward the Vlth's English translation, and 
in the first of queen Elizabeth's, " they believe 
not that whereon they were set ;" which transla- 
tion Illyricus approves, (d) " This is well to be 
marked, lest a man imagine that God himself did 
put them, and (as one, meaning Beza, against 
the nature of the Greek word, translates and in- 
terprets it) that God created them for this pur- 
pose, that they should withstand him. Erasmus 
and Calvin, referring this word to that which goes 
before, interpret it not amiss, that the Jews were 
made or ordained to believe the word of God, 
and their Messias ; but yet that they would not 
believe him ; for to them belonged the promises, 
the testaments, and the Messias himself; as St. 

(b) Annot. Nov. Test., anno 1556, Matt. vi. 13. 

(c) See Bucer's Scripta Anglicana, p. 931 ; et in Epist. 
ad Rom. in p. 1, c. 94. 

(d) Illyricus's Gloss, in 1 Pet. ii. 8. 



104 



PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS 



Peter says, Acts, ii. 3, and St. Paul, Rom. ix. 
And to them were committed the oracles of 
God, by witness of the same Paul, Rom. iii." 
Thus Ulyricus ; who has here given the true 
sense of this text, according to the signification 
of the Greek word ; and has proved the same 
by scripture, by St. Peter and St. Paid, and has 
confirmed it by Erasmus and Calvin. Yea, 
Luther follows the same sense in this place : so 
does Castalio in his annotations to the New 
Testament, 

Yet Beza, against all these, to defend his 
blasphemous doctrine, that " God leads men into 
temptation, and brings in satan to fill their hearts," 
translates it thus : Sunt imrnorigeri ad quod etiam 
conditi feurunt, (a) " They are rebellious, 
whereunto also they were created ;" With whom 
his scholars, our English translators, are resolv- 
ed to agree ; therefore, in their Bible of the 
year 1577, they read, " Being disobedient unto 
the which thing they were ordained." And in 
that of 1572 : " Being disobedient unto the which 
thing they were even ordained." This is yet 
worse, and with this, word for word, agrees the 
Testament of 1580, and the Scottish Bible of 
1579. This is also the Geneva translation in 
the Bible of 1561, which the French Geneva 
Bible follows. And how much our Protestant 
last translation differs from these, may be seen 
in 'the Bible printed at London, anno 1683, 
where it is read thus : " And a rock of offence, 
even to them which stumble at the word, being 
disobedient whereunto also they are appointed." 

Is not this to say positively, that God is au- 
thor of men's disobedience or rebellion against 
Christ 1 " But, if God," says Castalio against 
Beza, " hath created some men to rebellion or 
disobedience, he is author of their disobedience ; 
as if he has created some to obedience, he is 
truly author of their obedience." Yes, this is to 
make God the author of men's sin, for which 
purpose it was so translated : and thus Beza in 
his notes upon the text explains it ; that " men 
are made or fashioned, framed, stirred tip, crea- 
ted or ordained, not by themselves, for that were 
absurd, but by God, to be scandalized at him, 
and his Son our Saviour ; Ckristus est eis offen- 
diculo, prout etiam ad hoc ipsum a Deo sunt con- 
diti .-" and further discourses at large, and brings 
other texts to prove this sense, and this translation. 

And though Luther and Calvin, as is said, dis- 
sented not from the true sense of this text, yet 
touching the blasphemous doctrine, (b) that 
" God is the author of sin," they, with Zuinglius, 
must, for all this, have the right hand of Beza. 
" How can man prepare himself to good," says 
Luther, " seeing it is not in his power to make 
his ways evil ? For God works the wicked 
work in the wicked." 

" When we commit adultery or murder," says 
Zuinglius, " it is the work of God, being the 
mover, the author, and inciter, &c. God moves 

(a) Vide Castalio in Defensione qua Translat., pp. 153, 
154, 155. 

(6) Lut. To. 2, Wittem. an. 1551, Assert. Art. 36, Vid. 
de Servo. Arbit. fol. 195, Edit. 1603. Z jing. To. 10, de 
providentia Dei, fol. 365. 365, 3S7. 



the thief to kill, &c. He is forced to sin, &c. 
God hardened Pharaoh, not speaking hyperbo- 
lically, but he truly hardens him, yea, although 
he resist." By which, and other of his writings, 
he so plainly teaches God to be the author of 
sin, that he is therefore particularly reprehended 
by the learned Protestant, Grawerus, in Absur- 
da Absurdorum, c. 5, de Pradest., fol. 3, 4. 

" God is author," says Calvin, " of all those 
things, which these Popish judges would have to 
happen only by his idle sufferance." (c) He 
also affirms bur sins to be not only by God's 
permission, but by " his decree and will." Which 
blasphemy is so evidently taught by him and 
his followers, that they are expressly condemn- 
ed for it by their famous brethren : Feming, lib. 
de Univers. Grat.,p. 109 ; Osiander, Enchind. 
Controv., p. 104; Scaffman, de Peccat. y Causis, 
pp. 155, 27; Stizlinus, Dcsput. Theol. de Pro- 
vid. Dei. sect. 141 ; Graver, in Absurda Absurd., 
in Frontisp. Yea, the Protestant magistrates 
of Berne made it penal by the laws, for any in 
their territories to preach Calvin's doctrine 
thereof, or for the people to read any of his 
books concerning the same. (J) Are not these 
blessed reformers ? " O excellent instrument of 
God !" as Dr. Tenison styles the chief of them.(e) 
Protestants denying free will in man, not only 
to do good, but even to resist evil, open a very 
wide passage into this impious doctrine, of 
making God the author of sin. 

In 1 St. Peter i. 22. the apostle exhorts 
Christains to live as becomes men of so excel- 
lent a vocation : " Purifying," says he, " your 
souls by obedience of charity," (/) &c. ; a little 
before, verse 17, remembering always, that 
" God, without exception of persons, judges every 
man according to his works." From which place 
it appears, that we have free will working with 
the grace of God ; that we purify and cleanse 
our souls from sin ; that good works are neces 
sarily required of Christians : for by many di- 
vine arguments St. Peter urges this conclusion ; 
Ut animus nostras caslifcemus, " That we purify 
our own souls." So the Protestant translation, 
made in Edward the Sixth's time, has it, " For- 
asmuch as you have purified your souls." (g) 
So likewise one of queen Elizabeth's Bibles : 
" Even ye which have purified your souls ;" and 
so it is in the Greek. Notwithstanding all 
which, Beza, in his Testaments of 1556 and 
1565, translates it, Animabus veslris purificatis 
obediendo veritati per Spiritum : which another 
of queen Elizabeth s Bibles renders thus : " See- 
ing your souls are purified in obeying the truth, 
through the Sprit." So translates also the En- 
glish Bible, printed at Geneva, 1561, and the 
Scotch, printed at Edinburgh, 1579. 

So that these words make nothing at all either 
for free will, or co-operation with God's grace, 
or value of good works, but rather the con- 



(c) Calvin, instit. 1. 1, c. 18, and 1. 2, c. 4, and 1. 3, c. 23. 

(d) Vid. Litteras Senat. Bern, ad Ministros, &c. an. 
1555. 

(e) Dr. Ten. Conf. with M. P. 

(/ ) Castificantes animas vestras in obedientia Charitatis, 
(«■) Bib. 1561, 1579. 



OF THE SCRIPTURE. 



105 



trary ; proving that in our justification we 
work not, but are wrought ; we purify not our- 
selves, but are purified ; we are not active and 
doers with God's grace, but passive and suffer- 
ers ; which opinion the Council of Trent con- 
demns, (a) The Protestant Bible of 1683, has 
again corrected this, and translates : " Seeing ye 
have purified your souls," &c. ; but whether with 
any good and sincere intention, appears by their 
having left uncorrected another fault of the same 
stamp in Philippians i. 28. 

Where St. Paul, handling the same argument, 
exhorts the Christians not to fear the enemies 
of Christ, though they persecute ever so ter- 
ribly, " which to them," says he, " is cause of 
perdition, but to you of salvation ;" where he 
makes good works necessary, and so the causes 
of salvation, as sins are of damnation. But 
Beza will have the old interpreter overseen in 
so translating : " because," says he, " the afflic- 
tion of the faithful is never called the cause of 
their salvation, but the testimony." (b) And, 
therefore, translates the Greek word Idei^tc, 
indicium. And his scholars, the English trans- 
lators, render it a " token ;" though, indeed, one 
of their Testaments translates it, as we do, 
a " cause ;" so do also Erasmus, and the Ti- 
gurine translators ; (c) yea, the apostles com- 
paring sins with good works, these leading to 
heaven, as those to hell, convinces its sense to 
be so ; as Theodoret, a Greek father, also 
gathers from that word, saying : " That pro- 
cures to them destruction, but to you salvation." 
(d) So St. Augustine, St. Hierom, and other 
Latin fathers. 

And that good works are a cause of salvation, 
our Saviour himself clearly shows, when he thus 
speaks of Mary Magdalen : Remittuntur ei pec- 
cata rnulta, quoniam dilf.xit multum : " Many sins 
are forgiven her, because she loveth much." 
Against which no man living can cavil from the 
Greek, Hebrew, or Latin, but that works of 
charity are a cause why sins are forgiven ; and 
so a cause of our justification and salvation, 
which are evidently the words and meaning of 
our blessed Saviour. Notwithstanding, Beza 
and our English translators have a shift for this 
also ; he translates, Remissa sunt peccata ejus 
multa ; nam dilexit multum : which in our Eng- 
lish Bible is rendered, " Her sins which are 
many, are forgiven ; for she loved much ;" (e) 
which the reader, perhaps, may think to be a 
difference so small as is not worth taking notice 
of ; but, if well considered, will be found as great 
as is between our doctrine and Protestants. 
And first, the text is corrupted, by making a 
fuller point than either the Greek or Latin 
bears, the English making some a colon, (:) and 
some a semicolon, (;) where in the Greek there 
is only a comma (,) ; and Beza in his Latin, yet 
more desperately makes a down and full period, (.) 



(a) Sess. 6, cap. 4. 

ib) Beza Annot. in ilium locum. 

(c) Bib. 1561. 

(d) Theo.l. in Phil., cap. 

<e) Beza Test., anno 1565. Bib. 1683. 



thereby dividing and distracting the latter part 
from the former, as though it contained not a 
reason of that which went before, as it does, but 
were some new matter ; wherein he is controlled 
by another of his own translators, and by the 
Greek prints of Geneva, Zurich, Basil, and other 
German cities, who point it as it is in our Latin 
and English. But their falsehood appears much 
more in turning quoniam into nam, " because" 
into " for." (/) 

Seeing our Saviour's words are in effect thus : 
" Because she loved much, therefore, many sins 
are forgiven her ;" which they, by this perver- 
sion and mispointing it, make a quite different, 
and almost contrary sense ; thus : " Because she 
had many sins forgiven her, therefore, she loved 
much ;" and this love following was a token of 
the remission which she, by only faith, had ob- 
tained before ; so turning the cause into the 
effect, and the antecedent into the consequent, 
hereby utterly overthrowing the doctrine which 
Christ by his words and reason gives, and the 
church by his words and reason gathers. Beza 
blushes not to confess why he thus altered 
Christ's words, saying: Nam dilexit, Tiy&nvus, 
" For she loved :" the Vulgate translation and 
Erasmus render it, " Because she loved." " But 
I (says he) had rather interpret it as I do, that 
men may understand in these words to be shown, 
not the cause of remission of sins, but rather 
that which ensued after such remission, and that 
by the consequent is gathered the antecedent. 
And therefore, they who abuse this place, to 
overthrow free justification by faith alone, are 
very impudent and childish." (g) Thus Beza. 
But the ancient fathers, who were neither impu- 
dent nor childish, gathered from this text, that 
charity, as well as faith, is requisite for obtaining 
remission of sins. St. Chrysostom, Horn. 6, in 
Mat. says, (h) "As first by water and the 
Spirit, so afterwards by tears and confession, we 
are made clean ;" which he proves by this place. 
So St. Gregory, expounding this same place, 
says, " Many sins are forgiven her, because she 
loved much ; as if it had been said expressly, 
he burns out perfectly the rust of sin, whosoever 
burns vehemently with the fire of love. For so 
much more is the rust of sin scoured away, by 
how much more the heart of a sinner is inflamed 
with the great fire of charity." 

And St. Ambrose upon the same words — 
" Good are the tears which are able to wash 
away our sins. Good are the tears, wherein is 
not only the redemption of sinners, but also the 
refreshing of the just." 

And the great St. Augustine, debating this 
story in a long homily, says, (i) " This sinful 
woman, the more she owed, the more she loved ; 
the forgiver of her debts, our Lord himself, af- 
firming so : Many sins are forgiven her, because 
she loved much. And why loved she much, 



(/) 1556. 

(g) Beza in Luc. vii. 47. 
(A) Horn. 33, in Evang. 
(i) Horn. 23. inter. 50. 



106 



PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS. 



but because she owed much ? Why did she 
all these offices of weeping, washing, &c, but 
to obtain remission of her sins ?" Other holy 
fathers agree in the self-same verity, all making 
her love to be a cause going before, and not an 
effect or sequel coming after the remission of sins. 

I have only taken notice here how Beza and 
our English translators have corrupted this 
text ; but he who pleases to read Musculus, 
in locis Communibus, c. de Justijicat., 11,5, will 
find him perverting it after another strange 
manner, by boldly asserting, without all reason 
or probable conjecture, that our blessed Saviour 
spoke in Hebrew, and used the preterperfect for 
the present tense ; and that St. Luke wrote in 
the Doric dialect ; so that Musculus would have 
it said : " She loved Christ much, and no won- 
der ; she had good cause so to do, because many 
sins were forgiven her." 

But Zuinglius goes yet another way to work 
with this text, and tells us, that he supposes the 
word " love" should have been " faith :" his 
words are, " Because she loved much. I sup- 
pose, that love is here put for faith ; because she 
has so great affiance in me, so many sins are 
forgiven her. For he says afterwards, Thy 
faith hath saved thee ; that is, has absolved and 
delivered thee from thy sins." (a) Which one 
distinction of his, will answer all the places that 
in this controversy can be brought out of scrip- 
ture to refute their " only faith." But, to 
conclude, what can be more impious than to 
affirm, that for obtaining of sins, charity is not 
required as well as faith, seeing our blessed 
Saviour, if we credit his evangelist, St. Luke, 
and I think his authority ought to be preferred 
before that of Zuinglius, Beza, Musculus, or 
our English sectaries, most divinely conjoins 
charity with faith, saying of charity, " Many sins 
are forgiven her, because she loved much !" 
straightway adding of faith, " Thy faith has made 
thee safe ; go in peace." 

As you see here, they use all their endeavours 
to suppress the necessity of good and charitable 
works ; so, on the other side, they endeavoured 
to make their first Bibles countenance vice, (b) 
so far as to seem to allow of the detestable sin 
of usury, provided it were not hurtful to the 
borrower. In Deuteronomy xxiii. 19, they 
translate thus, " Thou shalt not hurt thy brother 
by usury of money, nor by usury of corn, nor by 
usury of any thing that he may be hurt withal ;" 
by which they would have it meant, that usury 
is not here forbidden, unless it hurts the party 
that borrows. A conceit so rooted in most 
men's hearts, that they think such usury very 
lawful, and therefore frequently offend therein. 
But Almighty God, in this place of holy scrip- 
ture, has not one word of hurting, or not hurting, 
as may be seen in the Hebrew and Greek ; and 
as also appears from their having corrected the 
same in their Bible of 1683, where they read, as 
it ought to be, " Thou shalt not. lend upon usury 
to thy brother, usury of money, usury of vic- 
tuals, usury of anything that is lent upon usury." 

(a) Zuing. in Luc. vii. To. 4. 
(5) Bib. 1562. 1577. 



If the Hebrew word signify to hurt by usury, 
why did not they, in the very words next fol- 
lowing, in the self-same Bibles, translate it thus : 
" Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury, 
but not unto thy brother ?" why said they not 
rather, " A stranger thou mayest hurt by usury, 
but not thy brother ?" is it not all the same in 
word and phrase here as before ? The Jews 
would have given them thanks for so translating 
it ; who, by forcing the Hebrew word as they 
do, think it well done, to hurt any stranger, that 
is, any Christian by usury, be it ever so great. 

Whether the first Protestant translators of 
the scriptures were guided by that spirit which 
should be in Christian Catholic translators, may 
be easily gathered from what follows, as well as 
from what you have already seen. 

They were so profane and dissolute, that 
some of them termed that divine book, 
called, Canticum, Canlicorum, containing the 
high mystery of Christ and his church, " The 
Ballad of Ballads of Solomon," as if it were a 
ballad of love, between Solomon and his concu- 
bine, as Castalio wantonly translated it. 

And yet more profanely, in another place, 
which even their last translation has not yet 
vouchsafed to correct, " We have conceived, we 
have born in pain, as though we should have 
brought forth wind." (c) I am ashamed to set 
down the literal commentary of this their trans- 
lation. Was there any thing in the Hebrew to 
hinder them from translating it in this manner: 
" We have conceived, and as it were travailed to 
bring forth, and have brought forth the Spirit ?" 
Why should they say wind rather than spirit? 
They are not ignorant, that the Septuagint in 
Greek, and the ancient fathers, do all expound 
it, (d, e,f.) according to both the Hebrew and 
Greek, of the " Spirit of God," which is first 
conceived in ns, and begins by fear, which the 
scripture calls : "The beginning of wisdom:" 
insomuch, that in the Greek there are these 
godly words, famous in all antiquity, " Through 
the fear of thee, Lord, we conceived, and 
have travailed with pain, and have brought forth 
the Spirit of thy salvation, which thou hast made 
upon the earth:" which excellently sets before 
our eyes the degrees of a faithful man's increase, 
and proceeding in the Spirit of God. But to 
say, " We have been with child," as their last 
translation has it, (g) " and have brought forth 
wind," can admit no spiritual interpretation ; but 
even as a mere Jew should translate, or under- 
stand it, who has no sense of the Spirit of God. 
It is the custom of Protestants, in all such cases 
as this, where the more appropriate sense is of 
God's holy Spirit, there to translate wind, as in 
Psalm cxlvii. 18. 

Another impropriety similar to this is, that 
they will not translate for the angel's honour 
that carried Habakuc, " He sent him into 
Babylon, over the lake, by the force of his 

(c) Isaiah xvi. 18. 

(d) St. Ambrose, lib. 2, de Interpret., c. 4. 

(e) Chrysostom, in Psal. vii. prop. fin. 
- (/) See S. Hierom upon this place. 

O) Bible 1683. 



OF THE SC 

spirit ;" but thus : " Through a mighty wind." 
So attributing it to the wind, not to the angel's 
power, and omitting quite the Greek word, hutS, 
" his," which showeth plainly, that it was the 
angel's spirit, force, and power. (a) 

Again, where the prophet Isaiah speaks most 
manifestly of Christ, saying : " And (our Lord) 
shall not cause thy doctor to fly from thee any 
more, and thine eyes shall see thy master •" 
which is all the same in effect with that which 
Christ says, " I will be with you unto the end of 
the world ;" there one of their Bibles translates 
thus, " Thy rain shall be no more kept back, 
but thine eyes shall see thy rain." Their last 
translation has corrected this mad falsification. (ft) 

Again, where the holy church reads.: "Re- 
joice, ye children of Zion, in the Lord your God, 
because he has given you the doctrine of jus- 
tice ;"(c) there one of their translations has it, 
" The rain of righteousness :" and their last 
Bible, instead of correcting the former, makes 
it yet worse, if it can be made worse, saying, 
" Be glad then, y« children of Sion, &c , for he 
hath given you the former rain moderately." 
Does the Hebrew word force them to this 1 
Doubtless they cannot but know, that it signifies 
a teacher or master : and therefore, even the 
Jews themselves, partly understand it of Esdras, 
partly of Christ's divinity : yet these new and 
partial translators are resolved to be more pro- 
fane than the very Jews. If they had, as I 
hinted above, been guided by a Catholic and 
Christian spirit, they might have been satisfied 
with the sense of St. Hierom, a Christian doctor, 
upon these places, who makes no doubt but the 
Hebrew is doctor, master, teacher ; who also in 
the psalm translates thus : " With blessings shall 
the doctor be arrayed, "(rf) meaning Christ ; 
where Protestants, with the Jews of latter days, 
the enemies of Christ, translate, " The rain covers 
the pools." "What cold stuff is this in respect of 
that other translation, so clearly pointing to 
Christ, our doctor, master and lawgiver. (e) 

And again, where St. Jerom, and all the 
fathers translate and expound, " There shall be 
faith in thy times," to express the wonderful 
faith that shall be among Christians ; there they 
translate, " There shall be stability of thy times." 
And their last Bible has it thus, " And wisdom 
and knowledge shall be the stability of thy 
times." Whereas the prophet reckons all these 
virtues singly, viz., judgment, justice, which 
they term righteousness, faith, wisdom, knowl- 
edge, and the fear of our Lord ; but they, for a 
little ambiguity of the Hebrew word, turn faith 
into stability. 

In Isa. xxxvii. 22, all their first Bibles read, 
" O virgin daughter of Sion, he hath despised 
thee, and laughed thee to scorn : O daughter of 
Jerusalem, he hath shaken his head at thee." In 
the Hebrew, Greek, St. Hierom's translation 
and commentary, as also in the last Protestant 
Bible, printed 1683, it is quite contrary, viz., 
o 

(a) Isa. xxx. 20. 

(b) Joel ii. 23. 

(c) Lyra in 30. 

{d) Psalm lxxxiv. 7- (e) Isaiah xxxiii. 6. 



RIPTUEE. 10? 

" The virgin daughter of Sion has despised thee, 
Assur : the daughter of Jerusalem has shaken 
her head at thee." All are of the feminine 
gender, and spoken of Sion literally triumphing 
over Assur ; and of the church spiritually tri- 
umphing over heresies, and all her enemies. In 
their first Bibles they translated all as of the 
masculine gender, thereby applying it to Assur ; 
insulting against Sion and Jerusalem. But for 
what cause or reason they thus falsify it, will be 
hard to determine, unless they dreaded, that by 
translating it otherwise it might be applied 
spiritually to the church's triumphing over 
themselves, as her enemies. We cannot judge 
it an oversight in them, because we find it so 
translated in the fourlh book of Kings, xix. 21, 
yea, and in all their first translations. 

A great many other faults are found in their 
first translations, which might be passed by, as 
not done upon any ill design, but perhaps, rather 
as mistakes or over-sights, (f) yet however, 
touching some few of them, it will not be amiss 
to demand a reason, why they were committed : 
as for example, why they translated, " Ye abject 
of the Gentiles," Isa. xlv. 20, rather than, " Ye, 
who are saved of the Gentiles;" or, as their 
translation has it, " Ye that are escaped of the 
nations ?" or, 

Why, in their Bible of 1579, did they write 
at length : " Two thousand to them that keep the 
fruit thereof," rather than " two hundred ;" as 
it is in the Hebrew and Greek, and as now their 
last Bible has it 1 or, 

Why read they in some of their Bibles, " As 
the fruits of cedar ;" and not rather according to 
the Greek and Hebrew, " Tabernacles of 
cedar ;" or however, as their last translation has 
it, " Tents of Kedar ?" or, 

Why do they translate : " Ask a sign, either 
in the depth, or in the height above," rather than, 
" Ask a sign, either in the depth of hell," &c, as 
the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin has it 1(g) Or, 
Why do they translate : " To make ready an 
horse," rather than " beasts," as the Greek has 
it ; and as also now their edition of 1683 reads 
it 1(h) Or, 

Why translate they : " If a man on the sab- 
bath-day receive circumcision, without breaking 
the law of Moses ;" rather than, according to 
the Greek, which their last translation has fol- 
lowed : " If a man on the sabbath-day receive 
circumcision, to the end the law of Moses should 
not be broken Or, 

Why read they : " The Son of man must 
suffer many things, and be reproved of the 
elders," for " be rejected of the elders," as 
the Greek, and now their Bibles of 1683 have 
it ; and as in the Psalm, " The stone which the 
builders rejected ;" we say not reproving of the 
said stone, which is Christ ?(#) 

Again, why translate they thus : Many which 

(/) Cantica. Canticor., viii. 12. ; Cantica. Canticor.,L 
4 ; Isa. vii. 11. 
(g) Isa. vii. 11. 
(A) Acts xxiii. 24. 
(?) Jo. vii. 23. 
(k) Mark viii. 31. 



108 PROTESTANT 

had seen the firs.t house, when the foundation of 
this house was laid before their eyes, wept," &c, 
when in the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, it is 
read thus : " Many who had seen the first house 
in the foundation thereof, (i. e., yet standing 
upon the foundation, undestroyed,) and this 
temple before their eyes, wept V I suppose 
they imagined, that it should be meant they 
saw Solomon's temple when it was first founded ; 



ABSURDITIES 

which, because it was impossible, they trans- 
lated otherwise than it is in the Hebrew and 
Greek : they should indeed have considered 
better of it. 

Though we do not look upon several of these 
as done, I say, with any ill design, yet we cannot 
excuse them for being done with much more 
licentious boldness than ought to appear in sin- 
cere and honest translators. 



ABSURDITIES IN TURNING PSALMS INTO METRE. 



Their unrestrained licentiousness is yet fur- 
ther manifest, in their turning of David's Psalms 
into rhyme, without reason, and then singing 
them in their congregations ; telling the people, 
from Saint James, v. : '.' If any be merry, let 
him sing psalms ;" being resolved to do nothing 
but what they produce a text of scripture for, 
though of their own making : for, though the 
apostle exhorts " such as are heavy, to pray," 
and " such as are merry, to sing ;" yet he does 
not in particular appoint David's Psalms to be 
sung by the merry, no more than he appoints our 
Lord's Prayer to be said by such as he exhorts 
to pray, though perhaps, he meant it of both : so 
that from any thing our bold interpreters can 
gather from the text, TEquo animo est ? Psallat. 
yxllsux), St. James might mean other spiritual 
songs and hymns, as well as David's Psalms : 
but be it that he exhorted them to sing David's 
Psalms, which we have no cause to deny, because 
the church of Christ has ever used the same ; yet 
that he meant it of such nonsensical rhymes as 
T. Sternhold, Joseph Hopkins, Robert Wisdom, 
and other Protestant poets have made to be sung 
in their churches, under the name of David's 



Psalms, none can ever grant, who has read 
them. It has hitherto been the practice of God's 
church to sing David's Psalms, as truly trans- 
lated from the Hebrew into Latin ; but never 
to sing such songs as Hopkins and Sternhold 
have turned from the English prose into metre : 
neither do I think that sober and judicious 
Protestants themselves can look upon them as 
good forms of praises to be sung in their churches 
to the glory, honour, and service of so great, so 
good, and so wise a God, when they shall con- 
sider how fully they are fraught with nonsense 
and ridiculous absurdities, besides many gross 
corruptions, viz., above two hundred ;(a) con- 
fessed by Protestants themselves to be found in 
the Psalms in prose, from which these were 
turned into metre, which we may guess are 
scarcely corrected by the rhyme. To collect all 
the faults committed by the said blessed poets 
in their psalm-metre, would be a task too tedious 
for my designed brevity ; I will, therefore, 
only set down some few of their absurd and 
ridiculous expressions ; and for the rest, leave the 
reader to compare these psalms in metre with the 
others in prose, even as by themselves translated. 



PSALMS in Prose, Bible 1683. 

Psalm ii. verse 3. 
Let us break their bands asunder, and cast 
away their cords from us. 



Psalm xvi. verses 9, 10. 
Theretore, my heart is glad, and my glory re- 
joiceth : my flesh also shall rest in hope. For 
thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, &c. 



Psalm xviii. verse 36. 
Thou hast enlarged my steps under me, that 
my feet did not slip. 



(a) See the Preface. 

(b) The reader need not be told why this is added, he- 
sides its making up the rhyme. 

(c) What they translate " glory " in prose they call 



PSALMS in Metre, Bible 1683. 



Psalm ii. verse 3. 
Shall we be bound to them ? say they ; 

Let all their bonds be broke, 
"And of their doctrine and their law, 

Let us reject the yoke. "(b) 

Psalm xvi. verses 9, 10. 
Wherefore my heart and " tongue" also, (e) 

Do both rejoice together ; 
My " flesh and body" rest in hope, 

When I this thing consider: 
Thou wilt not leave my soul in " grave," 

For, Lord, thou lovest me, &c. 

Psalm xviii. verse 36. 
And under me thou makest plain 

The way where I should walk : 
So that my feet shall never slip, 

" Nor stumble at a balk." 

" tongue," in rhyme. And for want of one foot to make 
up another verse, they thrust in a whole body, " flesh and 
body." Again, what in prose is called hell, in rhyme they 
term grave ; as if souls were left in the grave. 



EN TURNING PSALMS INTO METRE. 109 



PSALMS in Prose, Bible 1683. 

Psalm xviii. verse 37. 
I have pursued mine enemies, and overtaken 
them : neither did I turn again till they were 
consumed. 

Psalm xxii. verse 7. 
All they that see me, laugh me to scorn. 
They shoot out the lip, they shake the head. 

Psalm xxii, verse 12. 
Many bulls have compassed me, strong bulls 
of Basan have beset me round. 



Psalm xxvi. verse 10. 
In whose hand is mischief, and their right 
hand is full of bribes. 



Psalm xlix. verse 20. 
Man that is in honour, and understandeth not, 
is like the beasts that perish. 

Psalm lxxiv. verses 11, 12. 
Why withdraweth thou thy hand, even thy 
right hand ? Pluck it out of thy bosom. 

Psalm Ixxvii. verse 16. 
—He caused waters to run down like rivers. 

Psalm Ixxviii. verse 57. 
— They were turned aside like a deceitful bow. 

Psalm Ixxxix. verse 46. 
The days of his youth hast thou shortened : 
thou hast covered him with shame. Selah. 



Psalm xcvii. verse 12. 
Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness 
to the upright in heart. 

Psalm xcix. verse 1. 
The Lord reigneth, let the people tremble ; he 
sitteth between the cherubims, let the earth be 
moved. 

Psalm cxix. verse 70. 
Their heart is as fat as grease : (As fat as 
brawn, in another Bible. But in the Latin 
Vulgate, Coagulatum, est sicut lac cor eorum.) 

Psalm cxix. verse 83. 
For I am become like a bottle in smoke. 



(a) This warrior lays about him in a different manner 
from David. 

(6) We have heard of crafty heads, but never of crafty 
hands. 

(c) In the title page they say : " If any be merry, let him 
sing Dsalms." But considering what psalms they are, they 
15 



PSALMS in Metre, Bible 1683. 

Psalm xviii. verse 37. 
So I suppress and wound my foes, 

That they can rise no more: 
For at my feet they fall down flat, 

I strike them all so sore. (a) 

Psalm xxii. verse 7. 
All men despise, as they behold 

Me walking on the way : 
" They grin, they mow, they nod their heads," &c 
e 

Psalm xxii. verse 12. 
So many bulls do compass me, 

That be full strong of head : 
" Yea, bulls so fat, as though they had 

In Basan-field been fed. 

Psalm xxvi. verse 10. 
Whose hands are heap'd with " craft {b) and guile," 

Their lives thereof are full, 
And their right hand with " wrench and wile, 

For bribes doth pluck and pull." 

Psalm xlix. verse 20. 
Thus man to honour God hath brought, 

Yet doth he not consider ; 
But like brute beast, so doth he live, 

" And turn to dust and powder." 

Psalm lxxiv. verses 11, 12. 
Why dost thou draw thy hand " a back, 

And hide it in thy lap V 
O pluck it out, and be not slack, 

"To give thy foes a rap.''(c) 

Psalm Ixxvii. verse 16. 
— Of such abundance that " no floods 
To them might be compared." 

Psalm Ixxviii. verse 57. 
— They went astray, 
Much like a bow that would not bend, 
But slip and start away. 

Psalm Ixxxix. verse 46. 
Thou hast cut off, and made full short 

His youth and lusty days ; 
" And rais'd of him an ill report. 

With shame and great dispraise. "(d) 

Psalm xcvii. verse 12. 
And light doth spring up to the just, 

With pleasure for his part, 
Great joy with gladness, mirth and lust, &c.(«) 

Psalm xcix. verse 1. 
The Lord doth reign, " altho at it 

The people rage full sore ;" 
Yea, he on cherubims doth sit, 

" Tho' all the world do roar." 

Psalm cxix. verse 70, 
Their hearts are swoln with worldly wealth, 
As " grease so arc they fat." 



Psalm cxix. verse 83. 
As a " skin-bottle" in the smoke, 
So am I parch'd and dried. 



advise him to sing, they might have done as well to have 
said rather, " If any would be merry, let him sing psalms." 

(d) To say that God raises an ill report of men, has af- 
finity to Beza's doctrine, which makes God the author of 
sin. Vid. Supr. 

(e) I thought, till now, that lust had been a sin. tmm 



110 



PROTESTANT ABSURDITIES IN TURNING PSALMS INTO METRE. 



PSALMS in Prose, Bible 1683. 

Psalm cxix. verse 110. 
The wicked have laid a snare for me. 

Psalm cxix. verse 130. 
The entrance of thy word giveth light : it 
giveth understanding unto the simple. 

Psalm cxix. verse 150. 
They draw nigh that follow after mischief : 
they are far from thy law. 

Psalm cxx. verse 5. 
Woe is me, that I sojourn in Mesech, that I 
dwell in the tents of Kedar. 



Psalm cxxvii. verse 2. 
It is in vain for you to rise up early, to sit up 
late, to eat the bread of sorrow. 

Psalm cxxix. verse 6. 
Let them be as grass upon the house-tops, 
which withereth before it groweth up. 



PSALMS in Metre, Bible 1683. 

Psalm cxix. verse 110. 
Altho' the wicked laiJ their nets 
" To catch me at a bay." 

Psalm cxix. verse 130. 
When men first " enter into" thy word, 

They find a light most clear; 
And very idiots understand, 

" When they it read or hear ."(A) 

Psalm cxix. verse 150. 
My foes draw near, " and do procure 

My death maliciously :" 
Which from thy law are far gone back, 

" And strayed from it lewdly." 

Psalm cxx. verse 5. 
Alas! too long I slack, 
Within these tents "so black," 

Which Kedars are by " name ;" 
" By whom the flock elect, 
And all of Isaac's sect, 

Are put to open shame. "(c) 

Psalm cxxvii. verse 2. 

Though ye rise early in the morn, 
And so at night go late to bed, 
" Feeding full hardy with brown bread," 

Yet were your labour " lost and worn."(<2) 

Psalm cxxix. verse 6. 
And made as grass upon the house, 
Which withereth " ere it grow. "(e) 



I could weary the reader with such like ex- 
amples ; they seldom or never speak of God's 
covenant with Israel, but they call it God's 
trade. (a) As in Psalm lxxviii. 10, where they sing, 

For whyl they did not keep with God, 

The covenant that was made ; 
Nor yet would walk or lead their lives, 
According to his " trade." 

Psalm lxxxvii. verse 10. 
For why 1 their hearts were nothing bent 
To him, nor to his " trade." 

Psalm ex. verse 37. 
For this is unto Israel 
A statute and a " trade." 

Psalm lxxxi. verse 4. 
And set all my commandments light, 
And will not keep my " trade." 

Psalm lxxxix. verse 32. 
To them be made a law and " trade," &c. 

Psalm cxlviii . verse 6. 

Such stuff as this you will find in other 
places. The words " more" and " less" have 
also stood them in as good stead as " trade" to 
make rhyme with, viz : 

All men on earth, both " least" and " most." 

Psalm xxiii. verse 8. 
All kings, both " more" and " less." 

Psalm xlviii. verse 1 1 . 
The children of Israel each one both " more" and " less." 

Psalm xlviii, verse 14. 

See also Psalm cix. verse 10; Psalm xi. 
verse 6 ; Psalm xxvii. verse 8, &c, &c. 

Nor are they a little beholden to an " ever and 
for aye ;" " for ever and a day ;" " for evermore 
always," and the like. 

Besides their turning the psalms into metre, 

(a) Perhaps, this word " trade" should have been " tradi- 
tion" with them ; but for fear of a Popish term, which they 
so much detest they would rather write nonsense than use it. 



they also made rhyme of the Lord's Prayer, the 
Creed, and the Ten Commandments. In which 
one thing is remarkable, viz., that in the Creed, 
upon the article of Christ's descent into hell 
they make a very plain distinction between the 
hell of the damned, and that of the fathers of 
the Old Testament, Limbus Patrum, thus : 

And so he died in the flesh, but quickened in the sprite, 
His body then was buried, as is our use and right. 
His soul did after this descend into the lower parts, 
A dread unto the wicked spirits, butjoy to faithful hearts. 

Whom do they mean by those " faithful hearts," 
to whom our blessed Saviour's descent into hell 
Limbus, was a joy, but those of whom the pro- 
phet Zachary spoke, when prophecying of our 
Saviour's releasing them, he said : " Thou also 
in the blood of thy Testament hast let forth thy 
prisoners out of the lake, wherein there is no 
water ?" And, whom St. Peter meant, when he 
said, that Christ in spirit " coming, preached to 
the spirits also that were in prison ; which had 
been incredulous sometimes, when they expect- 
ed the patience of God in the days of Noe, 
when the ark was in building." (/) 

The turning of this article into metre is, I 
suppose, the very cause why we have not the 
Creed printed in metre in their latter impres- 
sions ; and consequently, none of the other pray- 

(b) By singing thus, they would possess the people that 
even the most ignorant of them are capable to understand 
the scripture when they read it, or have it read to them. 

(c) Why is all this added 1 only for the sake of rhyming 
to the word " name," unless they would make Isaac a 
sect maker, and his religion a sect like their own. 

{d) If brown bread is the bread of affliction, a great 
many feeds on it who are able to buy white. 

(e) How grass can wither before it grows, is a paradox. 
(/) Zach. ix. 11. 



PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS OF THE SCRIPTURE. 



m 



ers and rhymes, which their first Bibles had 
after the Psalms ; because to put out this and 
no more, would have given too shrewd a cause 
of suspicion. 

Besides the turning of these into metre, they 
made also certain other prayers of their own in 
rhyme ; in one of which they rank the Pope, 
whom their modern divines count a great bishop, 
and chief patriarch of the western church, and 
from whom they pretend to receive their episcopal 
and priestly character, in the same list with the 
Turk, as if both were infidels alike, and both 
alike enemies to Christ. Robert Wisdom thus 
sets out his psalm, which the ignorant people 
may be apt to take for one of Davids ; assuring 
themselves that David himself prayed to be de- 
livered from the Turk and the Pope, and conse- 
quently, that the Pope is a dangerous creature : 

Preserve us, Lord, by thy dear word, 
From Turk and Pope defend us, Lord, 
Which both would thrust out of his throne, 
Our Lord Jesus Christ, thy dear Son. 

But this, with such other like stuff, is also left 
out by Protestants in their last impressions, as 
being indeed ashamed of the impiety, malice, 
and folly of these gross imposters, especially of 
this Robert Wisdom, who, notwithstanding his 
name, was doubtless the most ignorant of all 
those who ever undertook to turn psalm into 
metre. And so it is likely he was looked upon 
by Dr. Corbet, sometimes bishop of Norwich, 
when he made the following address to his ghost : 

TO THE GHOST OF R. WISDOM. 

That once a body, now but air, 
Arch-botcher of a psalm or prayer, 

From Carfax (a) come, 
And patch us up a zealous lay, 
With an old ever and for aye, 

Or all and some. 

Or such a spirit lend me, 

As may an hymn down send me, 

To purge my brain. 
Then Robin look behind thee, 
Lest Turk or Pope do find thee, 
And go to bed again. 

This may seem too light for a treatise of this 
nature ; but the ridiculous absurdity of these 
rhymes, the singing of which in the churches, 
has, by several learned Protestants, been com- 
plained of and lamented, cannot be fully enough 
exposed; that so, if possible, the common peo- 
ple's eyes may be opened, and they may be taken 
off from the fondness they seem to have for 
them. 

Though the ignorance, rather than ill inten- 
tion of these busy poets appear in their psalm- 
metre ; yet what follows cannot be excused 
from being done with a very treacherous design 
of the translators ; for what can possibly be a 
more sly piece of craft to deceive the ignorant 
reader, than to use Catholic terms in all such 
places where they may render them odious, and 
when they must needs sound ill in the people's 
ears ? For example, 2 Maccabees vi. 7, this term 



" procession" they very maliciously translate, 
saying : " When the feast of Bacchus was kept, 
they were constrained to go in procession to 
Bacchus." Let the reader see in the Greek 
Lexicon if there be any thing in this word, 
no/nnadveiv tS> diovvaw, like the Catholic Church's 
processions, or whether it signify so much as 
li to go about," as other of their Bibles translate 
it, with perhaps no less ill meaning than that of 
1570, though they name not procession, (b) 

St. John, ix. 22, 25, where, for " He should 
be put out of the synagogue," there first transla- 
tions read : " He should be excommunicated," to 
make the Jews' doings against them, that con- 
fessed Christ, sound like the Catholic Church's 
acting against heretics, in excommunicating 
them ; as if the church's excommunication of 
such, from the society and participation of the 
faithful, were like to that exterior putting out 
of the synagogue. And by this they designed 
to disgrace the priest's power of excommunica- 
tion, whereas the Jews had no such spiritual ex- 
communication ; but, as the word only signifies, 
did put them out of the synagogue ; and so they 
should have translated the Greek word, includ- 
ing the very name synagogue. But this trans- 
lation was made when the excommunications 
of the Catholic church were daily denounced 
against them, which they have corrected in their 
last Bible, because themselves have begun to 
assume such a power of excommunicating their 
non-conforming brethren. 

In Acts xvii. 23, for " seeing your idols," or 
" seeing the things which you Athenians did 
worship," they translate, " seeing your devo- 
tions," as though devotion and superstition were 
all one. 

And verse 24, for " temples of Diana," they 
translate " shrines of Diana," to make the 
shrines of saints' bodies, and other holy relics, 
seem odious ; whereas the Greek word signifies 
temples. And Beza says : " He cannot see how- 
it can signify shrines." 

Thus they make use of Catholic words and 
terms, where they can thereby possibly render 
them odious ; but in other places, lest the an- 
cient words and names should still be retained, 
they change them into their own unaccustomed 
and original sound. So in the Old Testament, 
out of an itch to show their skill in the Hebrew, 
the first translators thought fit to change most of 
the proper names from the usual reading, never 
considering how far differently proper names of 
all sorts are both written and sounded in differ- 
ent languages ; but this is in a great part rectified 
by the last translators, according to the directions 
of king James the First, that in translating the 
proper names, they should retain the usual and 
accustomed manner of speaking. 

Their altering of these proper names in the 
Old Tastament, through the pride of being es- 
teemed such knowing masters in the Hebrew, 
was yet much more tolerable, than the changing 
of many other words in the New, through an 



(a) The place of his burial in Oxford. 



(b) Bib. 1562, 1577. 



i 13 



A VINDICATION OF 



heretical intention of introducing an utter obli- 
vion of them among the people. 

The words " church, bishop, priest, altar, 
eucharist, sacrifice, grace, sacrament, baptism, 
penance, angel, apostle, Christ, &c, at their 
first revolt, they suppressed, and changed into 
" congregation, superintendent, elder and minis- 
ter, table, thanksgiving, gift, mystery, washing, 
repentance, messenger, ambassador, anointed ;" 
several other words and phrases they likewise 
altered, as is evident from what goes before. 
And for what cause was all this change and al- 
teration of Catholic terms and phrases, but that 
the sound of the words should vanish with the 
substance of the things which they have taken 
away ? With bishops they banished the pastoral 
care and charge of the Pope and Catholic bish- 
ops, and set up a child and a woman for the 
heads of their congregation. With priests went 
away the office of priest, in offering the holy 
sacrifice of Christ's body and blood ; with grace 
went away the sacrament of holy orders, and 
four or five of the other sacraments ; with altar, 
eucharist and sacrifice, they excluded the proper 
service of Almighty God, with Christ's sacred 
presence in the blessed sacrament ; with the 
word penance they banished confession, absolu- 
tion, and satisfaction for sins ; they altered the 
word church, because they had cut themselves 
off from the Catholic church. And what other 
design could we suppose them to have had in 
leaving out apostles, and putting in ambassadors 
or legates ; in leaving out angels, and introduc- 
ing messengers ; in putting down the word 
anointed, where Christ used to be read ; and in 
translating grave for hell ; but in time to ex- 
tinguish all faith and memory of apostle, angel, 
heaven, hell, Christ, and Christianity ;" and to 
bring them to atheism and infidelity, the very 
centre to which their reformation tends 1 (a) 



This fantastical and impious vanity, in chang- 
ing Catholic and Christian terms and speeches 
into their profane and heathenish use and signi- 
fication, was a thing so detested, even by Beza 
himself, notwithstanding his often being guilty 
of the same, that he inveighs against it, and 
those who use it, in this manner : " The world 
is now come to that pass," says he, " that not 
only they who write their own discourses, re- 
fuse the familiar and accustomed words of scrip- 
ture, as obscure, unsavoury, and out of use, but 
also those that translate the scripture out of 
Greek into Latin, challenge to themselves the 
like liberty ; so as while every man will rather 
freely follow his own judgment than religiously 
behave himself as the Holy Ghost's interpreter, 
many things they do not convert, but pervert, 
for which licentiousness and boldness, except 
remedy be provided in time, either I am notably 
deceived, or within a few years, instead of Chris- 
tians we shall become Ciceronians, i. e. Pagans, 
and by little and little shall lose the possession 
of the things themselves." (6) By this you see, 
that though Beza was one of the greatest mas- 
ters in this wanton, novel, and licentious art of 
changing Christian for Heathen terms and 
phrases, yet he foresaw that in the end, with the 
words, would be taken away the things signified, 
" sacraments, baptism, eucharists, priesthood, 
sacrifice, angels, apostles, and all apostolical 
doctrine ;" and that so we should be brought 
again from Christianity to heathenism. 

From which, and from the Stillingfleetian 
error, (c) that, by asserting, " The pagan god, 
Jupiter, to be the true God, blessed for ever, 
more," throws open the door of Jupiter's temple, 
and points out the very pathway to paganism, 

GOOD LORD, DF. LIVER US ! 



A VINDICATION OF THE ROMAN CATHOLICS : 

AS ALSO THEIR DECLARATION, AFFIRMATION, COMMINATION ; SHOWING THEIR ABHORRENCE 
OF THE FOLLOWING TENETS, COMMONLY LAID AT THEIR DOOR. AND THEY HERE OBLIGE 
THEMSELVES, THAT IF THE ENSUING CURSES BE ADDED TO THOSE APPOINTED TO BE 
READ ON THE FIRST DAY OF LENT, THEY WILL SERIOUSLY AND HEARTILY ANSWER AMEN 
TO THEM ALL. 



1. Cursed is he that commits idolatry ; that 
prays to images or relics, or worships them for 
God. R. Amen. 

2. Cursed is every goddess worshipper, that 
believes the Virgin Mary to be any more than a 
creature ; that honours her, worships her, or 
puts his trust in her more than in God ; that be- 
lieves her above her Son, or that she can in any 
thing command him. R. Amen. 

3. Cursed is he that believes the saints in 
heaven to be his redeemers, and prays to them 
as such, or that gives God's honour to them, or 
to any creature whatsoever. R. Amen. 

4. Cursed is he that worships any breaden 

(a) Change of words induces change of faith. 



god, or makes gods of the empty elements of 
bread and wine. R. Amen. 

5. Cursed is he that believes priests can for- 
give sins whether the sinner repent or not : or 
that there is any power in earth or heaven that 
can forgive sins, without a hearty repentance 
and serious purpose of amendment. R. Amen. 

6. Cursed is he that believes there is authority 
in the Pope or any others, that can give leave to 
commit sins ; or that can forgive him his sins 
for a sum of money. R. Amen. 

7. Cursed is he that believes that, independently 

(b) Beza in Act. x. 46, edit anno 1556, but in the lat- 
ter ed. of 1565, some of these words are altered either by 
himself or the printer. 

(c) Dr. Stillingfleet's Charge of Idolatry against the 

Church of Rome. p. 7j and p. 40. 



THE ROMAN 

of the merits and passion of Christ, he can merit 
salvation by his own good works ; or make con- 
dign satisfaction for the guilt of his sins, or the 
pains eternal due to them. R. Amen. 

8. Cursed is he that contemns the word of 
God, or hides it from the people, on design to 
keep them from the knowledge of their duty, 
and to preserve them in ignorance and error. 
R. Amen. 

9. Cursed is he that undervalues the word of 
God, or that forsaking scripture chooses rather 
to follow human traditions than it. R. Amen. 

10. Cursed is he that leaves the command- 
ments of God, to observe the constitutions of 
men. R. Amen. 

11. Cursed is he that omits any of the Ten 
Commandments, or keeps the people from the 
knowledge of any one of them, to the end that 
they may not have occasion of discovering the 
truth. R. Amen. 

12. Cursed is he that preaches to the people 
in unknown tongues, such as they understand 
not ; or uses any other means to keep them in 
ignorance. R. Amen. 

13. Cursed is he that believes that the Pope 
can give to any, upon any account whatsoever, 
dispensation to lie or swear falsely ; or that it is 
lawful for any, at the last hour, to protest him- 
self innocent in case he be guilty. R. Amen. 

14. Cursed is he that encourages sins, or 
teaches men to defer the amendment of their 
lives, on presumption of their death-bed repen- 
tance. R. Amen. 

15. Cursed is he that teaches men that they 
may be lawfully drunk on a Friday or any other 
fasting-day, though they must not taste the least 
bit of flesh. R. Amen. 

16. Cursed is he who places religion in 
nothing but a pompous show, consisting only in 
ceremonies ; and which teaches not the people 
to serve God in spirit and truth. R. Amen. 

17. Cursed is he who loves or promotes 
cruelty, that teaches people to be bloody-mind- 
ed, and to lay aside the meekness of Jesus Christ. 
R. Amen. 

18. Cursed is he who teaches that it is law- 
ful to do any wicked thing, though it be for the 
interest and good of mother church : or that any 
evil action may be done that good may come of 
it. R. Amen. 

19. Cursed are we, if amongst all these 
wicked principles and damnable doctrines com- 
monly laid at our doors, any one of them be 
the faith of our church ; and cursed are we, if 
we do not as heartily detest all those hellish 
practices as those who so vehemently urge them 
against us. R. Amen. 

20. Cursed are we, if in answering, and saying 
Amen to any of these curses, we use any equivo- 
cation, mental reservation ; or do not assent to 
them in the common and obvious sense of the 
words. R. Amen. 

And can the Papists then, thus seriously, and 



catholics. 113 

without check of conscience, say Amen to all 
these curses ? 

Yes, they can, and are ready to do it whenso- 
ever, and as often as it shall be required of them. 
And what then is to be said of those who either 
by word or writing, charge these doctrines upon 
the faith of the Church of Rome 1 " Is a lying 
spirit in the mouth of all the prophets 1 are they 
all gone aside ? do they backbite with their 
tongues, do evil to their neighbour, and take up 
reproach against their neighbour ?" I will say no 
such thing, but leave the impartial considerer to 
judge. One thing I can safely affirm, that the 
" Papists" are foully misrepresented, and show in 
public as much unlike what they are, as the 
Christians were of old by the Gentiles ; that they 
lie under a great calumny, and severely smart in 
good name, persons, and estates, for such things 
which they as much and as heartily detest as those 
who 'accuse them. But the comfort is, Christ 
has said to his followers : " Ye shall be hated of 
all men." (Math. x. 22,) and St. Paul : "We 
are made a spectacle unto the world ;" and we 
do not doubt, that he who bears this with pa- 
tience, shall for every loss here and contempt 
receive a hundred-fold in heaven : " For the base 
things of the world, and things which are de- 
spised, hath God chosen." 1 Corinth, i. 28. 

As for problematical disputes, or errors of 
particular divines, in this, or any other matter 
whatsoever, the Catholic Church is no way re- 
sponsible for them ; nor are Catholics, as Catho- 
lics, justly punishable on their accouut. But, 

As for the king-killing doctrine, or murder of 
princes, excommunicated for heresy ; it is an ar- 
ticle of faith in the Catholic Church, and ex- 
pressly declared in the General Council of Con- 
stance, sess. 15, that such doctrine is damnable 
and heretical, being contrary to the known laws 
of God and nature. 

Personal misdemeanors of what nature soever, 
ought not to be imputed to the Catholic Church, 
when not justifiable by the tenets of her faith and 
doctrine. For which reason, though the stories 
of the Paris massacre ; the Irish cruelties, or 
powder-plot, had been exactly true, (which yet 
for the most parts are mis-related) nevertheless 
Catholics as Catholics, ought not to suffer for 
such offences, any more than the eleven apostles 
ought to have suffered for Judas's treachery. 

It is an article of the Catholic faith to believe, 
that no power on earth can license men to lie, 
forswear, and perjure themselves, to massacre 
their neighbours, or destroy their native country, 
on pretence of promoting the Catholic cause, or 
religion. Furthermore, all pardons and dispen- 
sations granted, or pretended to be granted, in 
order to any such ends or designs, have no other 
validity or effect, than to add sacrilege and 
blasphemy to the above-mentioned crimes. 

Sweet Jesus, bless our sovereign : pardon 
our enemies. Grant us patience ; and establish 
peace and charity in our nation. 



VERSION OF THE ENGLISH BIBLE : 

A VINDICATION OF WARD'S ERRATA, IN REPLY TO GRIER, BY THE RIGHT REV. DR. MILNER. 



Dear Sir — You have witnessed the failure of 
our vicar in his attempt to vindicate the canon 
of scripture, without recourse to the authority 
of tradition, and this on Protestant, as well as 
on Catholic grounds. As to the other point, 
which he says he is equally called upon to prove, 
on the same condition of not recurring to tra- 
dition, namely : " Which are the books that have 
been written by Divine inspiration, and, indeed, 
that any books at all have been so written,"(a) 
he entirely gives it up, in the following terms : 
" To pronounce with confidence what books of 
the canon, or parts of books, are inspired, and 
what not, may consistently belong to Dr. M., 
as being a member of a church which lays claim 
to infallibility : but certainly not to a member 
of the Church of England. So that when he 
asks, how we have learned, what books have been 
written by Divine inspiration, or that any boohs 
at all have been so written ? we may answer that, 
where the holy scriptures declare that they set 
forth a divine revelation, or that they express 
the word of God, we believe them to do so : 
[thus again grounding a thing to be proved upon 
itself!] but as to the fact of their inspiration, 
we must, with awe and humility, decline to say, 
what we believe no church, ancient or modern, 
can attest. "(b) If this were so, I would ask 
the vicar, of what great use is the scripture 
more than any other good book ? and why is it 
called the word of God ? Again, with what 
consistency does the Church of England appeal 
to it, in her Articles, as her only rule of faith ? 
But the vicar's ideas are evidently confused on 
the subject, and therefore, he hastens to another 
more familiar to him, since he has already pub- 
lished a quarto volume on the fidelity of the 
English Bible. However, as the fifty pages he 
spends upon it in the present work, consist, for 
the most part, of mere declamation in praise of 
the translation, its authors, and himself, together 
with proportional abuse of its critics, and Dr. M., 
(a style in which I will not contend with the 
Rev. Gentleman,) I hope to be able to confine 
my reflections within much narrower bounds 
than he confines his. 

The vicar begins his declamation, dear Sir, 
with unlimited abuse of your correspondent. 
This he carries on through the greater part of 
ten pages, reproaching me with, ignorance, super- 
ciliousness, arrogance, superfcialness, tyc.(c) In 

a) Reply, p. 2. 

b) P. 9. 

(c) P. 61, et seq. 



short, he says, that " Dr. M. cannot stand a 
competition, on the score of learning and talents, 
with even the obscurest," of the fifty-four clergy- 
men who were named in the reign of James I., 
to make a new version of the scripture, though 
he confesses there are five amongst them of 
whom he knows nothing at all, and some others, 
of whom he has barely learned something from 
the late Dr. Todd.(d) To this abuse I am content 
to answer, that as the vicar knows nothing of 
me or my attainments, but what he learns from 
my publications, which, together with his own, 
are before the world, so our respective charac- 
ters for learning and talents will not be decided 
upon by what we may say of ourselves, but by 
what others may judge of us. 

The very profession of the vicar, which is to 
vindicate, at the same time Tyndal's translation 
of the Bible, and king James's correction of it, 
as being both of them faultless, carries with it 
its own refutation, and betrays his insincerity 
and spirit of chicanery. His fellow-labourer, 
Dr. Ryan, whose Analysis of Ward's Errata(e) 
he has commended, " as decisive to the extent 
it goes,"(/) very fairly gives up several corrup- 
tions of the sacred text, which disgraced Tyn- 
dal's and the other early translations and edi- 
tions of the English Bible, during more than 
fifty years, as indefensible. Thus, for example, 
speaking of Ward, he says : " He produces seven 
texts to show that we mistranslated our Bible, 
for the purpose of injuring his church, and to 
excuse our apostacy from it ; but the former 
mistranslations of these seven texts having been 
corrected in our present Bible, should have been 
excluded from his catalogue of errata."(#) 
With the same fairness Dr. Ryan says : " He 
(Ward) produces eight texts, which he accuses 
us of misconstruing against the sacrament and 
mass ; but five of the eight having been correc- 
ted in our version, agreeably to his own, should 
have been excluded from the book. "(A) The 

(d) P. 66. (e) Dublin, 1808. (/ ) Reply, p. 94. 

(g) Analysis, p. 10. In Tyndal's translation, and the 
editions of 15G2, 1577, 1579, instead of the word church, 
the word congregation is used in the following manner : 
Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my con- 
gregation, Mat. xvi. 18. If he will not hear them, tell the 
congregation ; and if he will not hear the congregation, 
let him be to thee as a heathen, &c. Mat. xviii. 17. 

(A) Ibid., p. 12. In two of these passages, Mat. xxvi. 
and Mark xiv. 22, instead of saying : Jesus blessed the 
bread, the old editions say : Having given thanks. In 
two other passages, 1 Cor. ix. 13, and 3 Cor. x. 18, the 
word temple is used, instead of altar, to exclude the 
idea of a sacrifice under the new law. 



VERSION OX' THE 

Doctor proceeds : " Our opponent (Ward) 
charges us with misconstruing twelve texts, for 
the purpose of proving Catholics guilty of idol- 
atry." But six of the twelve being corrected in 
our Bible, ought to have been omitted " in his 
list." (a) In a word, this advocate of the Eng- 
lish Bible challenges the Popish doctors, as he 
calls them, to answer him this question : " Did 
not the translators of our Bible of the year 1683, 
correct forty errors in our old ones ? (b) Such 
is the acknowledgment of Dr. Ryan, writing 
in defence of the English Bible, against the 
learned cavalier Thomas Ward ; but the Rev. 
Mr. Grier undertakes equally to vindicate the 
old version and the new one, the corrected and 
the uncorrected text ; and even in those very 
passages in which the infidelity of the latter is 
most glaring, and obnoxious to the English 
Church as well as to the Catholic Church. For 
example, he defends Tyndal and his followers 
in the use of the word congregation, for that of 
church, affirming that, in so doing, " they did 
not depart from the letter or the meaning of 
the Holy Ghost." (c) In a word, he pronounces, 
with Selden's Table- Talker, that " the English 
translation of the Bible is the best in the world, 
and which renders the sense of the original the 
best ; taking in for the English translation the 
Bishop's Bible as well as king James's ;" ad- 
ding : " The bishops made the preceding Eng- 
lish versions of Tyndal and Coverdale, the 
models and as it were the basis of their own." 
(d) Thus then, according to the vicar, the ver- 
sion of the Lutheran Tyndal from the Latin 
Vulgate, of the Calvinist Coverdale, from the 
Vulgate and the Greek, (e) and the corrected 
version of the English divines from the Hebrew 
and the Greek, though often differing from each 
other in meaning, as well as in other respects, 
are each of them " the best translation in the world, 
and renders the sense of the original the best." 

The vicar, as might be expected, speaks in 
high terms of Tyndal, whom John Fox calls 
England's apostle, and with equal censure of his 
great antagonist, Sir Thomas More. Had the 
vicar read and faithfully exhibited the former's 

(a) Ibid. p. 24. The following are some of the old 
corruptions, which have been since corrected, according 
to the original, and the Rheims Testament, Coloss. iii. 5, 
Covetousness, which is the worshipping of images, Ephes. 
y. 5 ; 2 Cor. vi. 16, How agreeth the tem.ple of God with 
images? 1 John v. 21, Babes, keep yourselves from images. 

(b) P. 62. To this the Catholic Doctors answer in the 
affirmative. But they add first, that the very circumstance 
of their being corrected by Protestants, is a proof that 
the latter acknowledged them to be errors : secondly, that 
after the forty corrections in question have been made, a 
still greater number of corrections remain to be made. 

(c) Answer to Ward's Errata, by the Rev. R. Grier, 
1812, p. 2. To this, his former work, the vicar refers in 
his present Reply, with his usual modesty, as follows : " I 
trust the readers of my Answer will credit the truth of the 
assertion, that my publication, comprising, as it does, the 
ablest arguments of our most learned divines, contains a 
full and victorious refutation of pernicious error ; and 
that I have successfully established the superior merit of 
our standing English text, no less than its fidelity " — 
Reply, p. 94. (d) P. 76. 

(e) Coverdale had the chief hand in the Geneva edition, 
which was so obnoxious to the Church of England, that 
the prelates of the establishment constantly oppose its 
publication, as may be seen in Strype. 



ENGLISH BIBLE. 115 

books, called, The Wicked Mammon, The True 
Obedience, and The Answer e to Syr T. More, 
together with the latter's Confutacion of Tyn- 
dale's Answere, <fyc, I am convinced he must 
have lowered his tone of panegyric with respect 
to Tyndal into that of extenuation, at least, as 
he would have found this pretended apostle's 
language to be no less seditious than it is hetero- 
dox, and no less injurious to the present Church 
of England, than it was to that of former times. 
With the most specious pretentions to charity 
and submission, he terms, at every turn, those 
who were most dignified and venerated in church 
and state, " apish, pivish, popish jugglers, thieves, 
murtherers, blood-suppers, Pilates, Herods, 
priapists, sodomites, hangmen, Christ-killers, 
devils, &c." (/) The learned and dignified 
author, quoted below, points out, " amonge other 
tokens of Tyndale's evill intent in hys transla- 
cion, for enswatnple, that he chaunged common- 
lye this woorde churche into this woorde congre- 
gacion, and this woorde priest into this woorde 
seniour ; and charitie into love, and grace into 
favour, confession into knowledge, and penaunce 
and repentance, with wordes mo, which he 
chaunged and useth dayly, as in turning ydoles 
into ymages, and anonynting into smering, conse- 
crating into charming, sacramentes into cere- 
monys, and ceremonys into witchecrafte, and yet 
many moe." (g) Notwithstanding John Fox at- 
tributes a splendid miracle (in rendering void 
the enchantment of a certain magician,) to the 
sanctity of Tyndal, (h) he is far from succeed- 
ing in vindicating his religious or his moral 
principals. (*) It appears that, though Cover- 
dale encouraged his disciple Frith to die for his 
belief, yet, it is plain, from his story, that he 
himself suffered death, not for that, or his Eng- 
lish translation of the Bible, but for treasonable 
practises against the government of the Low 
Countries, under which he lived. But why does 
not the vicar honour the name of the above-men- 
tioned Frith, who had so large a share in his 
master Tyndal's Bible, with a single notice 1 I 
can conceive no other motive for this, except 
that, when he was burnt in Henry's reign, for 
denying the Catholic doctrine of the sacrament, 
archbishop Cranmer had the chief hand in bring- 
ing him to the stake. The vicar, however, makes 
amends for this omission, by the lofty praises he 
heaps on the " venerable Coverdale," as he calls 
him, who was the most conspicuous character 
in giving the early editions of the English Bible. 
This apostate friar was of the same religious 
order with Luther, and, like him, broke through 
his solemn vow of continency, by taking to him- 
self a pretended wife, during the confusion of 
Edward's reign, at which time also he became 
bishop of Exeter. Retiring to Geneva, when 
Mary mounted the throne, he sucked in there 

(/) Sir Thomas More's Works, London, 1517, p. 336. 

(g) Syr T. More's Second Boke, whiche confuteth the 
Defence of Tyndall, for his Translacion, p- 405. 
(A) See Acts and Moriani. 

(i) This appears by his attempt to get into Bishop Tun- 
stars service, after he had declared himself a Protestant, 
and by his constant maxim of, bearing with the times 



116 



VERSION OF THE ENGLISH BIBLE. 



the doctrine and prejudices of Calvin, so that, j 
returning to England when Elizabeth became \ 
queen, he was neither restored to his see, nor 
treated as a bishop. It was not without diffi- 
culty that he obtained the poor living of St. 
Magnus', near London Bridge, and he was, after 
some time, turned out of that for non-comformity. 
The vicar sets up a most curious proof of the 
fidelity of Coverdale's biblical labours, which is 
worthy, dear sir, of your notice, as a specimen 
of the conclusiveness of his reasoning ; it is 
this, Fulk declares as follows : " I myself did 
heare that Reverend father, M. Dr. Coverdale, 
of holie and learned memorie, in a sermon at 
St. Paule's Crosse, upon occasion of some 
slaunderous reportes, that then were raised 
against his translation, declare his faithful pur- 
pose in doing the same, which, after it was 
finished and presented to K. Henry VIII., and 
by him committed to diverse bishops of that 
time to peruse, of which, as I remember, Stephen 
Gardiner was one — they being demanded by 
the king, Are there any heresies maintained 
thereby ? They answered that there were no 
heresies that they could find maintained there- 
by." (a) So far Fulke, to whose account of 
Coverdale's sermon, the vicar subjoins the fol- 
lowing inference : " This single admission of 
Gardiner speaks volumes!" But, dear Sir, I 
would ask the reverend gentleman the following 
questions ; Of what weight is William Fulke's 
account of Miles Coverdale's sermon in defence 
of the old exploded version ? Secondly, What 
signify Stephen Gardiner's words concerning it, 
or any other point during Henry's reign, when lie 
was as abject a slave to the religious tyrant as 
Cranmer himself was? Thirdly, What proof of 
the fidelity of a scriptural translation would the 
decision even of a council be, that it maintained \ 
no heresies ; when it might be found censurable 
on twenty other theological charges ? And what 
then becomes of the reverend vicar's volumes of 
evidence, for the purity of Coverdale's version ? 
But the simple fact of a new translation of the 
whole scripture having been set on foot and ex- 
ecuted by authority both of church and state, in 
James's reign, is a proof that the former version 
of Tyndal and Coverdale, even after it had 
been corrected by the bishops was deemed to 
be faulty. That it did abound with errors is 
demonstrated by the learned Gregory Martin, in 
his Discoverie, &c, whom Fulke in vain at- 
tempted to answer. The same is again de- 
monstrated, together with sufficient proofs that 
the present version also abounds with errors, by 
the intelligent Thomas Ward, in his Errata, 
the success of whose undertaking accounts 
for the vicar's unbounded abuse of him. (b) 
But what need is there of a further exposure 

f» Reply, p. 73. 

(b) There is no expression of hatred and contempt too 
strong for the vicar, in speaking of these two able and 
learned men, which is the best proof of his being wound- 
ed by their pens, and his inability to cope with th^m. The j 
fellnw students of Gregory Martin, at Oxford, bore a very I 
different testimony of his learning and merit from that of j 
Mr. Grier. The celebrated historian of that university re- j 
lates that, when the Duke of Norfolk, to whose eldest son 



of the latter's absurdity, in attempting to vin- 
dicate both the old and the new version, the un- 
corrected and the corrected one, and to prove 
that each of them is the best translation in the 
world, than the vicar's subsequent comparison 
between them, and the preference which he 
gives, in an important instance, to the former 1 (c) 

Proceeding to treat of the new version of the 
scriptures, which was made by order of king- 
James I., more than seventy years after the first 
appearance of the former, the vicar chiefly con- 
fines himself to combating the following pas- 
sage in The End of Controversy, where, speak- 
ing of the Bibles, " which had been published 
by authority or generally used by Protestants in 
this country," the author said : " Those of Tyn- 
dal, Coverdale, and queen Elizabeth's bishops, 
were so notoriously corrupt, as to cause a gen- 
eral outcry against them among learned Protes- 
tants, as well as among Catholics, in which 
the king himself, James I., joined : and accord- 
ingly, he ordered a new version of it to be made, 
being the same that is now in use, with some few 
alterations made in it after the restoration. "(d) 

The vicar commences his attack on this pas- 
sage with denying, first, that learned divines of 
the Church of England, whom alone he ac- 
knowledges to be Protestants, objected to the 
old version ; and, secondly, that the Puritans, 
to whom he refuses that title, raised an outcry 
against it. But I would ask him, whether the 
subscribers to the Millinary Petition to Parlia- 
ment, who therein describe themselves to be 
" more than a thousand ministers, that had sub- 
scribed the service book" of Common-Prayer, 
and whose representatives, at the conference of 
Hampton-Court, were Dr. Reynolds, and Dr. 
Spark, both of them professors of Oxford Uni- 
versity, were not divines of the Church of Eng- 
land ? And whether these representatives did 
not then and there petition as follows ; " May it 
please your Majesty, that the Bible be newly 
translated, such as are extant not answering the 
original, which he (Dr. Reynold's) instanced in 

Martin was then domestic tutor, visited St. John's College, 
he was greeted with a public oration, in which the orator, 
speaking of its great ornament, Gregory Martin said : 

" Habes, illustrissime Dux, Hebrcemn nostrum, Gracum 
nostrum, 

Poetam nostrum, decus et sloriam noslram." 

Alhen. Oxon., P. 1, N. 221. 

With respect to Ward, it may be enough to say that, 
though a layman, and a military man, he proved himself 
to be an overmatch for his different clerical antagonists, 
one of whom was Richel, vicar of Hexarn; another, 
Tennison. A. B., of Canterbury. See his Monomachia. 
His Cantos on the Reformation, though written in dogrel 
verse, contain such sterling matter, as to have caused the 
conversion of many Protestants, and among others, of 
the late Rev. Roland Davies, C. A. D. The vicar's pre- 
tended Answer to the Errata, was the prototype to his 
Reply to the End of Controversy. He writes much about 
different subjects, and about them, and makes many bold 
assertions and denials, but never once proves the point 
which he takes in hand to prove. 

(c) Quoting that foolish book, Sel-len's Table-Talk, he 
says that " The Bishop's Bible ( the old translation,) copied 
chiefly from Tyndal and Coverdale, ranks equally high, 
as a translation", with king James's, and either of them is 
the best translation in the world." — Reply, p. 76. 

(d) End of Controversy, Let. ix., p. 71. 



VERSION OF THE 

three particulars." («) Did not the Lincolnshire 
ministers present a petition to the king in De- 
cember, 1604, complaining that " the book of 
Common Prayer appoints such a translation of 
scripture to be used in the churches, as in some 
places is absurd, and in others, takes from, per- 
verts, obscures, and falsifies the word of God ; 
examples of which are produced with the autho- 
rities of the most considerable reformers." (b) 
Was not Broughton of Cambridge an episcopal 
Protestant, and " the greatest scholar of his 
age for Hebrew," as Strype testifies ? And yet 
he charged the Bible, authorized in his time, 
(the Bishops' Bible) with " a great number of 
errors," which he called " traps and pitfalls ;" 
adding, in his letter to the Lord Treasurer, | 
that sundry lords and some bishops, and others 
of inferior rank, had requested him to bestow 
his labour in clearing the Bible translations, (c) 
Finally the vicar himself quotes the translators 
of the new version as " echoing the words of the 
king," when they state that " upon the impor- 
tunate petition of the Puritans," the conference 
of Hampton-Court was held, in which " they 
had recourse at last to this shift, that they could 
not with good conscience, subscribe to the Com- 
munion Book, since it maintained the Bible as it j 
was there translated, which was, as they said, 
a most corrupt translation." (d) I would now 
appeal to any candid reader, of whatever reli- 
gion he may be, no less than to yourself, whether 
I was not justified in stating, " there was an 
outcry against those Bibles, (Tyndal's, Cover- 
dale's, and the Bishops') among learned Protes- 
tants, as well as Catholics ?" It remains to be 
seen whether " king James joined in it or not V 
The vicar is forced to acknowledge the truth 
of Fuller's and Collier's account of this business ; 
who state, that on Dr. Reynolds' petition being 
made, his Majesty answered : " I profess I 
could never yet see a Bible well translated in 
English ; but I think that, of all, that of Geneva 
is the worst." (e) This declaration the vicar 
says, " can only be supposed to mean that he 
never yet had seen an English Bible in which 
there were not passages capable of being better 
translated ! (f) His pretext for this perversion of 
language is, that when the king gave orders for 
the new translation, which he represents him to 
have done merely to humour a poor empty shift, 
a mere shallow pretence (g) of the Church of 

(a) These particulars are the following : 1st. Gal. iv. 25, 
s-vrrot^ei, wrong translated bordereth. According to this, 
Mount Sina in Arabia, borders upon Jerusalem ! 2ndly, 
Ps. cv. 28, They were not disobedient (or they rebelled not,) 
contradictorily translated, They were not obedient. 3rdly, 
Ps.cvi.20, Phineas executed judgment, wrong translated, 
Phineas prayed. See Fuller's Ch. Hist., B. x., p. 14. The 
vicar asserts that " the passages at first objected to (by the 
non-conformists, and which he calls an empty shift and a 
hollow pretence,) have continued in it (the existing version) 
without alteration," p. 81. Now the fact is, that each of 
them has been altered according to the suggestion of Dr. 
Reynolds and his party, as will be seen in the present Eng- 
lish Bible. 

(b) Neal's Hist, of the Puritans, vol. ii. p. 53. 

(c) Strype's Life of A. B. Whitgift, pp. 433,587. 

(d) Reply, p. 80. 

(e) Fuller. Eccl. Hist., B. x., p. 14. 
(/)lbid.,p.91. (g) Reply, p. 81. 

16 



ENGLISH BIBLE. 117 

England's enemies, he gave directions that " The 
Bishops' Bible be followed, and as little altered 
as the truth of the original will permit ; and that 
Tyndal's, &c, be used when they agree better 
with the text than the Bishops'." (h) And yet 
what else does this signify, except that the 
Bishops' Bible, is not always conformable to the 
truth of the original ? and that the other editions 
sometimes agree better with the text than does 
the bishops' 1 ? Such is the vicar's ingenuity in 
refuting his own argument ; after which exhi- 
bition, he concludes, with his customary self- 
complacency, " I have thus disposed of the 
royal censure in all its bearings." (i) 

The vicar represents it to be a demonstra- 
i tive proof of the different sects of non-con- 
formists and dissenters subscribing to the purity 
and excellence of the present version, that 
they have never attempted to substitute another 
in its place. But is this the fact? Did not 
the Grand Committee for Religion, in 1656, 
when the Presbyterians were in power, appoint 
a sub-committee, " to confer with Dr. Walton 
and five others about another translation of the 
Bible ! and were not many meetings held on 
this subject at secretary Whitlock's house V (k) 
Again, at the Savoy Conference in 1661, did not 
the non-conformist divines object to a great num- 
ber of faulty translations of scriptural passages 
which occurred in the liturgy, and obtain that 
they should be amended ; (I) I need say nothing 
by way of answer to the vicar, in justification of 
Sir Thomas More's, bishop Tunstall's, and other 
Catholics' predictions, as to the consequences to 
be expected from the general diffusion of Tyn- 
dal's and the other Protestant Bibles without an 
expositor, or so much as a commentary or note 
upon them, since these were visibly fulfilled in 
the sacrilegious confusion of Edward's reign, and 
still more in the fanatic rebellion and regicide 
fury of that of Charles I., when not a folly or 
a crime took place without chapter and verse 
being quoted in its vindication. In short, the 
Established Church of England, with the vicar 
himself, has at last taken just alarm at the 
consequences to be apprehended for herself, 
as well as for the state, from an unbounded 
and indiscriminate diffusion of Bibles, without 
the Prayer Book to direct its meaning. I do 
not find myself called upon to make any re- 
mark on the praises which the twenty-two 
Protestant writers, whom he quotes, bestow 
on their own Bible. The vicar's citation of 
these twenty-two witnesses makes no more for 
his cause, than if I were to cite the two hundred 
and fifty-two prelates of the Council of Trent 
who pronounced upon mine. 

Speaking of the last English translation of the 
Bible, the one now in use, published by king 

(A) P. 91. 
(i) P. 92. 

(k) Collier's Eccl. Hist., P. ii., p. 869. 
(I) For example, in the Epistle of the First Sunday after 
Epiph.,Rom. xii. 1, the text stood thus : Be ye changed in 
your shape. In the Epist. for Sunday before Easter, Philip, 
ii. 5, Christ was said to be found in his apparel as a man 
Collier, P. ii., p. 878. 



118 



VERSION OF THE ENGLISH RIM.r 



James I., in 1611, the author of The End of 
Controversy said : " Though these new transla- 
tors have corrected many wilful errors of their 
predecessors, most of which are levelled at Ca- 
tholic doctrines and discipline, yet they have left 
a sufficient number of these behind, for which I 
do not find that their advocates offer any ex- 
cuse." Two of these he specified as standing 
in direct opposition to the original text, as it is 
quoted by those advocates, Dr. Ryan and the 
Rev. Mr. Grier. (a) On these two points, one of 
them regarding the celibacy of the clergy, the 
other, communion under one kind, the last 
named gentleman says : " I join issue with Dr. 
M." (b) I will state each of them briefly, yet 
clearly. Our B. Saviour having condemned 
the Jewish practice of divorce, His disciples say 
unto him : If the case of a man be so with his 
ivife, it is not good to marry. But he said 
unto them: All men receive not this saying : 
in Greek : ov navjeg xwqoogi top Xoyov iovtov. 
Mat. xix. 2. In like manner St. Paul says, 1 Cor. 
vii. 7 : / say therefore to the unmarried and 
widows : it is good for them if they abide even 
as I ; but if they do not contain let them 
marry ; in Greek et de ovx eyy.oarsvoviai. Now 
in both these passages, the latter as well as the 
earlier Protestant translators change do not 
into cannot, in excuse for the first reformers' 
breach of their vowed celibacy, (c) With re- 
spect to the former of these falsifications, Dr. 
Ryan derides it, and says : " The Remish ver- 
sion agrees nearly with our own !" (d) while 
the vicar refers to his former work for a satis- 
factory proof that the word cannot " is most 
agreeable to the original," (e) which says do not. 
As to the second falsification, the vicar says : 
" I have been obliged to convict Dr. M. of gross 
ignorance of the Greek, no less than a fraudu- 
lent application of the Latin, and have proved 
to demonstration that the Rhemish version of 
this text, £t 8s ovx EyQcnevovzcu is erroneous." 
(f) Now in what does this boasted conviction of 
my ignorance, and of the erroneousness of the 
Rhemish version, consist ? Why the vicar says 

(a) End of Controv., Let. ix., p. 72. 

(b) P. 95. 

(c) Another falsification of the same kind , which seems to 
be levelled at the tenet of free-will .occurs both in the earlier 
and later version of Galat. v. 17. The apostle says : You 
DO NOT the things that you would : a ai> Qe\r]TC ravra Troirire; 
til is the translators turn thus : So that you cannot do the 
things that you would, contrary to the original Greek, the 
Latin Vulgate, the Syriac, Arias .Montanus, Erasmus, 
Beza, Tremellius, &c. It is extraordinary that neither 
the editor of the Rheims Testament nor Ward has pointed 
out this corruption. 

(d) Analysis, p. 19. 

(e) Reply, p. 95. On consulting the book and page here 
referred to, the only words relating to the translation itself, 
consist in a repetition of Ryan's above-quoted falsehood, 
namely, he says : " The Rhemish construction does not 
substantially differ from the Protestant one." The rest of 
his long dissertation is made up of his own confused expo- 
sition of the scripture and the fathers on the subject of 
celibacy. See Answer to Ward, pp. 33, 34, 35. 

(/) Ibid., p. 95. 



that eygxTsvo/Joti " is a verb of the middle voice," 
and that " the Vulgate reading, which agrees 
with it, is, si vero se non continent, (g) that is 
to say : if they do not contain themselves ;" 
therefore, according to the vicar, the passage 
ought to be translated : if they cannot contain, 
as in the common Bible ! What is it that chi- 
canery and confidence will not attempt to prove ! 
The other instance of still subsisting error in 
the latter translation of the Bible, as well as in 
the former, consists in the false translation of 
1 Cor. xi. 27, where St. Paul speaking of the 
B. Sacrament, says : Whosoever shall eat this 
bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord un- 
worthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the 
blood of the Lord : Slaze og uv eadtn iov uotov 
toviov v rtivi] to noinoiov rov xvqiov ava^tug, svo- 
%oz, eorai jov ouiftuioq xui ai/ionug rov xvqiov. 
This text, which is so decisive in favour of the 
Catholic doctrine, respecting the body and blood 
of Christ being received under either kind in the 
B. Sacrament, is, on that account, falsified in 
both translations of the English Bible, by turning 
the disjunctive article or, into the conjunctive 
article and. Dr. Ryan finding this falsification 
(which Ward does not fail to expose) too gross 
to be defended, very prudently passes it by un- 
answered. The vicar had, in his former work, 
attempted to prove that v and xui, or and and, 
are convertible articles ! At present he con- 
tents himself with relating a story about Dr. 
Kilbie, who, he says, hearing a certain clergy- 
man maintain in the pulpit that there are three 
arguments against the translation of a certain 
word, in the way it has been translated, an- 
swered him that there are thirteen reasons why 
it should be translated as it stands ; concluding 
thus : " To Dr. M. I leave the application of 
the foregoing anecdote ; for it certainly affords 
a useful hint to a self-confident critic." Such 
is the issue of the contest to which the vicar 
challenged me ! And such are his reasons 
for showing that the term do not, should 
be translated cannot, and why the disjunctive 
or, should be changed into the conjunctive 
and. I hope you will not forget Dr. Kilbie : 
if I do not mistake, the vicar will again intro- 
duce him to you. In the mean time, I remain, 
Yours, &c, 

J. M., D. D 



P. S.— The vicar's mode of reasoning on the 
corruption in question is of a piece with that 
of Luther, quoted by me in Letters to a Pre- 
bendary, Let. v., p. 187, when "being called to 
an account for an undeniable false translation 
of scripture, he answered : " Sic volo, sic jubco, 
Luther usita vult, et ait se doclorem esse supra 
omnes doctor es in toto Papatu." 

(g) Answer, p. 35. 



the end. 



N. B.— For a list of additional errors in late additions of the Protestant Bible, sec the " Rock of tU Church."— -Ed. 



